False solution?

The statement "this statement is false" is a paradox because it would be false to say that the statement is true despite the subject in which the statement is referring to is true, while it is equally true to say that the statement is false because it falsely describe the truth of the subject matter. Therefore unless a statement can co-exist in both falsehood and being true, this statement would be an invalidity.

It appears that the statement exists in two different dimensions if it were to be logically non-fallacious. First, the statement "this statement is false" interpreted unto itself with its own universe of logic. Second, the statement "this statement is false" as a holistically detached form of arbitrary with no significance in meaning. Then again, the second requirement does not seem to fit in with the contradiction of the matter at stake, thereby creating an inability for a categorical assessment of statement to pose a paradoxical problem. If it were to have a meaning on its own, then it would have intertwine with the first dimension, leaving the paradox unresolved.

What about this interpretation: The main statement is true to say that the statement being referred to in the main statement is false because the subject matter being referred to is true. But it would be false to say that the statement being referred to in the main statement is true if the subject matter being referred to is true. Hence, it is false to say that the main statement is true when it says that the statement being referred to in the main statement is true if the subject matter referred to in the statement referring to the main statement is true.

Is the problem solved in my context, or have I fallen into its fallacy yet again...