Forewarning: Be prepared to sit down for a read. By no means is this something you can casually glance at and get the entire meaning.
I've been revisiting this initial idea I had a few years ago, and have yet to come up with a definite answer. So I think to myself, "Maybe the infinite wisdom of teh interwebs will provide some insight!" Here's hoping I can at least prove this much.
If you take a theory that is completely immaterial in its' execution, does writing down the mechanics of it eliminate the immaterial aspect of it?
This is gonna require some more in-depth exploration.
A piece of paper will never be the sun. A piece of paper will never be my aunt's cream of chicken noodle soup. A piece of paper only has a limited number of things it can become, revert to, or be reduced to. It is, after all, a piece of paper. Said paper could become a frog via origami, compressed into the casing for a rear-view mirror, or a simple paper airplane signed by "Johnny" thrown at some ancient figure of educational authority (hence getting Johnny into trouble while you are, in fact, Ted.)
So, what's the point of discussing paper? It's an example that something material, something we can touch, see, smell, taste (college-ruled tastes like ass, btw), and hear, yet, lacks unlimited potentiality. It has limits.
So, how do we eliminate these limits?
What limits the paper? Well, it's flammable, tastes like ass, and it will only take up a certain amount of mass unless it is built upon or destroyed. No matter what you fold paper into, the paper itself will always take up the same amount of physical space. It may appear larger, but you have to consider the air between the various planes. The space that the paper occupies will remain the same, short of intense gravity or a lack of it. Flammability, taste, smell, touch, sound, and sight can be altered depending on the kind of paper it is, but it will still occupy space. And therein lies the most limiting factor of all. Fix this idea in your mind, and hold on to the constant. It will always occupy space.
Now then, replace the paper with something else. For this, we'll use one of the various Dr. Pepper cans littering my desk. Again, it has the same aspects as the piece of paper. No, my Dr. Pepper can is not made of paper, and it very much so does not taste like ass. But we can still see, touch, smell, taste, and hear it. The aluminum it's made up of will always occupy space. Take a look around your desk. I'd bet good money that all of these aspects can be applied to everything on your desk (including your Edward "action figure".)
All good now? Glad to see you're coming with me on this. I have to explain it to myself every time I get back to this topic, so you're not the only one lost, just bear with me.
So now that we've all agreed that these things all share the same basic aspects, how do we eliminate them? Burn them all to the ground, you say? No, no. That only converts them to either energy or another form of matter. We can still feel heat, and we can still feel the remains of your once proud Hawaiian Punch Temple. So all we've done is either converted or altered what it used to be. Okay, so that didn't work. Round two. Fight!
Before you throw that first punch or get decked by Lil' Mac, stop and consider what the real constant is. All these objects consist of matter. Even the air inside and around them is made up of it. We'll always be able to pick up on some form of it.
"But I'm confused, Ursangus. What does this have to do with immaterialism?" Take that image of a piece of paper in your head, and remove it. Don't imagine it burning, folding, dry-humping a pencil, or becoming the ever-feared despot of Uruguay. It's gone. Not a thing left. Es diparut!
Why did I just spend the last 30 minutes describing a piece of paper to you? To eliminate the existence of something, you have to be familiar with just what it means. So! With no matter to make it up, what are we left with? Certainly not paper. It dined and dashed. What will take it's place? I have literally no idea, and that's the point.
Without matter to make it up, we're left with absolutely pure potentiality. But what to do with it? We can't touch it, taste it, hear it, see it, or smell it.
Now then. I want you to take this massless pure potentiality, and build a machine out of it. I don't rightly know what the machine is for, but whatever it does, we're gonna need blueprints for it. But, if you take a theory that is completely immaterial in its' execution, does writing down the mechanics of it eliminate the immaterial aspect of it?