I am going to try and make some sense out of the senseless and some meaning out of the meaningless.
I will use Einstein, Hawking and string theories to contrast and solidify a theory of all that is.
We seem locked into a world that can’t see outside of its own realm.
All theories start with some sort of great mass inhibited by some sort of energy.
I struggle through dreams/visions of transparent glass, reflective mirrors, water, fire, empty space, time, black holes, the color red, spheres and geometry of every shape and size all to only become confused in the end by infinity itself.
So we are locked into not understanding by our own seemingly limited symology and physical geometry of numbers and theories. Oozing pools of smart elements, frothy bubbles and, what created chemistry itself?
In math we have four states that we use to describe nearly every known phenomenon in the real world. Like pillars they lock us behind their bars, a limiting prison that we dare not try and escape from. Something is either added, multiplied, subtracted or divided. Beyond that we simply stop trying to conceptualize things.
Yet, there is one symbol we have not attached to a theoretical action… What is the symbol for “created?” Creation is neither addition, subtraction, multiplication nor division. Science has left us with no possible way to represent our beginning with the tools provided..
Science does not have a symbol for creation… thus an equation for space and time will never be possible until that symbol is devised.
The problems with all physical theories i.e. big bang, quantum string theories and singularity is there is always a question that can be asked that shatters the theory in the very same manner.
Let’s start with the big bang…
It seems plausible that the universe started with a big bang considering the red shift of stellar objects and the sound waves we hear that are a result of this big bang. Though the “big bang” has either passed or has been canceled by another big bang that we are somewhere in the canceled field between these big bangs. Like two stones dropped in a swimming pool the waves cancel in the center where they collide. Well our earth must be in such a place. For if there was a really big bang why is our world silent to us. There must be another force that is at work through time and space perhaps the bang has not reached us yet or has passed us already and moved ahead of our time. This seems curious that if the “big bang” has passed us already yet light is still reaching us from stellar objects that we can see that date back to the formation of our universe then it seems the actual noise of the big bang is long behind and will take eons to reach us.
Regardless there is a seemingly known fabric to our universe, an impedance to light and sound. That light takes many billions upon billions of years to travel across time and space simply attests to the immensity of the known universe.
Yet science points to the ideal that the universe is apparently finite and with its own beginning.
Whether if we coalesce all of the constituents elements of the universe into one mass and portray it as blowing up and scattering all of its matter out and away from its epicenter we still have a beginning.
I find it curious that a big bang usually scatters matter in all directions regardless of what is in its way. Yet our universe seems to be expanding all in one direction as if there is an even greater force of energy containing it and shaping the explosion in a controlled way.
That there was a structure to the empty space where the big bang occurred.
The seemingly simple question is, what created the materials that were present in the big bang?
Perhaps there were very tight “invisible” strings of great mass that funneled the universe explosion into its own pattern of expansion and decay.
And even so then before the strings if all things were once massed into a great singularity then what created that?
All physical theories fall apart when asked, “what created them?” Thus the only answer is to start with absolutely noting. Yet nothing may have properties that everything cannot have.
Many of these answers are right in front of our face. Yet we are distracted by the imagery of our physical world. We are distracted by the tools used to perceive and measure the physical world such that we overlook the symbols that define infinity and utter emptiness.
For we dismiss infinity and emptiness because we ourselves cannot perceive or measure them. Infinity seems to bend in upon itself and the visible laws of the universe display corruption and decay. Also the laws of the universe seem to dictate a beginning and it seems imperceptible that there is simply no beginning to our physical model of space and time. Time itself requires a beginning. How do we measure nothing how do we define zero divided by itself? How can we define the undefined? What representation do you give as an answer? We do not have symbols to represent those kinds of dilemmas.
We perceive space and mass as different things.
Did space create mass or mass create space?
What symbol do we have in math for creation? Relativity can be defined because it is in the realm of mass and energy as it is affected by velocity.
Thus creation is an assumption in itself. We can say we were not created until something proves that assumption wrong or we can assume we were created until something proves that wrong.
People want to know the answers… We are on this finite rock of earth floating in space with seemingly infinite complexity. Each person has only, if we are fortunate, one hundred years to figure it all out before we become cosmic dust floating on the surface of some cosmic sea of collective speculation.
So we dream about black holes, empty dry canyons, panes of glass, clouds, justice, love liberty etc in our heated pursuit for the answer. Like Alice through the looking glass we want to perceive beyond our perceived reality into an alternative dimension that explains our existence.
We seem to become dissatisfied with all physical theories when we ask ourselves what created the original materials of big bangs, quantum strings and singularities so then we delve back into the objects of our perceived world looking for clues within them. It seems we circle round and round in our search for what we are. We will never find the answer within our reality. For what created our reality is also outside of our reality thus outside our ability to measure. We only see faint traces of our creator within the paint on the canvas and instead of the style of our universe we are transfixed by the portrait instead. The portrait on the canvas is not a self portrait but a combination of many images composed to reveal the intent of the painter.
Does the creator look like planets, suns, saturn, earth, black holes is god pure energy or empty space?
Can natural eyes see and behold the creator?
Is the creator ever present but invisible in our world? Is the creator omni and multi dimensional? Can zero be measured and seen through a telescope?
The only way to resolve the physical theories (relativity, strings and singularity) is to hypothesize that, “zero created the universe.” There is no equation that can be used mathematically to represent this because there is no symbol for creation in mathematics and science.
Just ask yourself, who created the big bang? Who created the strings in quantum mechanics? Who created the singularity? Each time you come up with yet another layer of needed discovery.
Yet, when you ask yourself who created zero? Only then do we understand the greatness, immensity, implications, nature‘s grand design and the infinity of zero itself. Only then can we glimpse into what we are on the other side. Only then can step beyond the physical world into the isness of everything that is.
Then we see the answer has been right there all along. In the beginning zero created one. In the beginning zero created energy (heaven) and mass (earth). One might call this a singularity but singularity just does not reveal the same ideal as zero. For a singularity is a thing where zero is nothing.
It is simply foolishness to then ask, “well then who created noting (zero)?”
Only zero answers this dilemma. Only zero prevails. Zero is more than a seed. For one might ask who created the seed? What came first the chicken or the egg?
Then we enter back into the circular logic of the physical world that can be measured by math. Only when we perceive zero as nothing do we then understand the true implications of our creators omnipotent reign over all that is. That out of nothing came everything. And what created nothing? That is when the redundant egg within an egg within an egg (matryoshka doll) question becomes moot.
Science rejects creation and until they give creation its own symbol and unique meaning their theories of infinite speculation will be nothing more than a matryoshka doll leading deeper down the rabbit hole pure speculation and grandiose imagination. Eventually science will exhaust itself and have to face that fact that only a concept like zero can answer their endless search for the unknown, undefined, uncreated and what unexists.
Only when zero becomes science and we examine the creative properties of zero will we then be able to build a scientific theory the unifies all things into one exquisite equation that explains “the beginning”…
In the beginning zero created one. Zero represents creation itself and one represents all other numbers, science, the physical world, energy and everything theoretically measurable by our set of known symbols and abstract vectors of scientific expression.
Zero is the only symbol that transcends science. Zero even transcends infinity, for infinity as we know it is based upon our own physical model. It is still measured by time, space and science relative from those future beings able to perceive their own current time happening long after we are gone.
Zero created our own perceived infinity and zero will accompany our physical universe to the end of time as we know it. Till the last atom decays into the abyss.
Only zero can create
Peace and oneness with zero,
creation through condescension or
partum sententia condescensio