Something from Nothing?

In my response to my last post, “A Theory of Relativity,” I discussed why I question the notion of an “expanding” and “contracting” universe, since that which “expands” and “contracts” is necessarily limited and finite.  Since there can be no beginning and no end to ALL, due to the fact something can always only come from that which is preexisting to itself, including the universe, I have been quite taken with Lawrence M. Krauss’ assertion in his book, “A Universe from Nothing,” which states the universe could have come “from nothing.”

As I listen to many atheists, it is quite striking to me how often they sound no different than their theistic adversaries they so ardently criticize.  I have as little regard for traditional religious doctrine as any atheist, but virtually all theists and atheists fall into the exact same trap of believing time, space, and ego are all essential, permanent realities, when they are not.  It is this assumption of the essential reality of ego, and with it, the belief in the illusions of time and space, of “beginnings” and “endings,” which is the entire problem for those who fall on both sides of the argument, whether one believes in God or not.

Consciousness is synonymous with the principle of stasis, as we have discovered before. Energy is a “thought,” an “idea” of consciousness if you will, born of the beginningless and endless interplay of the two fundamental principles of oneness – stasis, and change. Quantum fluctuations are said to be responsible for the temporary change of energy in a point of space, or the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of empty space, which gives rise to the belief by some scientists we can somehow get “something from nothing.”  However, quantum fluctuations as an action is itself “something,” because all which we describe as “something,” is in truth, action.  All “objects” and “beings” are not really static, but ever-changing forms of energy, and are therefore “actions” if you will. Knowledge of this brings to mind a description of death by the brilliant physicist Sean Carroll, who described death as the fact of us “no longer happening” – like a flame that is extinguished. We, like all things are a process, not a “fixed” and “permanent” being or “soul.” When the process of our organism stops, we die, as a flame dies when it is extinguished.

So the very actions of quantum fluctuations are themselves “something,” just the same as energy, which negates the idea purported by physicists such as Krauss that something can come from nothing, which is a contradiction.  The very potential for quantum fluctuations – the very fact they happen at all is also “something,” even if scientists would reject this fact.  But because we often define “nothing” as the absence of matter/energy, and not the absence of potential, nor the principles of stasis and change we cannot quantify, some scientists therefore believe that something can in fact come from “nothing,” when it never can, since such a notion is a logical contradiction and therefore an impossibility. From true nothingness – including the absence of the very potential for any given thing to happen or for something to come into existence, only nothing is possible.  Everything must therefore be comprised of that which is preexisting always.  That which is always preexisting, are the fundamental principles of consciousness and change themselves, which are uncreated – that which have always been and will forever be, manifesting the result of their interplay in all actions and all things – including quantum fluctuations. As I spoke with my best friend from college on this, we discovered this description of oneness and the fundamental principles of consciousness and change sound very much like “God.”  It is the closest notion of God in a truthful sense I can think of, but again, consciousness and change are two inseparable principles of one whole – two sides of the same one coin, and not a “separate” and “independent,” dualistic ego with a “will,” “plan,” or “purpose” for what it “does” or “does not do,” as the traditional Judeo-Christian and Islamic God is defined.  Egolessness and unity – not separation, is the Truth of the Oneness of All.

Since all is One and inseparable – then energy, consciousness, and change are in truth, one and the same, even while energy “appears” to come “in” and “out” of existence.  The bottom line is, there is no beginning and no end to ALL because ALL is ONE, which simply manifests itself in countless forms and actions as a result of the beginningless and endless interplay of the two fundamental principles of Oneness – stasis and change.  What we call the “appearance” and “disappearance” of specific forms such as “universes,” planets, stars, and sentient beings, is what we call “beginnings” and “endings,” “births” and “deaths.” Since no “action” or “thing” is any essential, unchanging reality, then no “thing,” in truth, exists.  That is the part physicists like Krauss fail to see. Krauss states how he is interested in looking for the “end” of the universe, and that is precisely the problem. He is focusing on examining the “end” of a particular form, while failing to look at the ALL of which all forms are just a part. He is looking for the “end,” when ultimately, there is none, since there is no beginning; because regardless of whether or not our particular current universe had a beginning or will have an end, or however many different “big bangs” and “big crunches” may have happened and may continue to happen over the course of infinity to “reorganize” energy of the same One ALL into different versions of a manifested universe is beside the point, since there can ultimately be no “beginning” or “end” to ALL and its Oneness. There is only a beginningless and endless cycle of the interplay of stasis and change, which is therefore timeless.  Once again, we see how the illusion of ego hides the truth of the selfless, timeless, and inseparable Oneness of All…

Listen to the audio version of “Something from Nothing?”

Posted in Creation and Evolution, Other Thoughts Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*