Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing? Mechanism for the Expansion of the Zero Absolute Volume State of Non-Existence into the Non-Zero Relative Volume of Existence

Abstract

    In a preceeding paper (1), the idea of a whole and its relationship to the
definition of "existence" was discussed.  There, "existence" was defined as a
whole and "exists" as the property of being whole.  The rationale for this was
that a whole, by virtue of its wholeness or completeness, has an edge or
boundary (wholes without edges or boundaries, indicating their completeness,
wouldn't be wholes) and because it has an edge or boundary, a whole becomes
something that has substance; that is, it is a "thing"; it "is"; it "exists".
In another paper (2), everything that could be considered to exist was assumed
to occupy non-zero volume; therefore, non-existence was defined as zero
volume, as seen from our reference frame (ie, observation point).  Evidence was
presented that this zero volume of non-existence was a whole (because that
zero volume included all, and no volume or thing was missing) and, therefore,
actually could be said to exist from a reference frame that could see the
wholeness, or edge, of the zero volume.  In the present paper, a mechanism for
the expansion of the zero volume of this existent state of non-existence (ie,
"nothing") into the non-zero volume of our existence (ie, "something") is
proposed.  Briefly, assume an initial condition of zero volume, as seen from
our reference frame (ie, observation point), or what is traditionally called
non-existence.  Then:

o This zero volume is a whole, has an edge and exists.  Because it exists, it
  can also be called the state of non-existence.  A hypothetical observer that
  could see the wholeness, or edge of the state of non-existence would view
  this state as a sphere because the zero volume inside the edge is the same
  distance "across" as seen from all perspectives (2).  This is the definition
  of a sphere.

o Edges, by their very nature, have outsides.  What is outside the edge of the
  state of non-existence?  Because we assumed zero volume, the only thing that
  can be outside the edge of the state of non-existence can be "more" zero
  volume (ie, the lack of volume).  Therefore, the edge has caused the
  formation of a new instance of zero volume all along its spherical outside.
  Because there can be no distance smaller than the diameter of the state of
  non-existence, the zero volume along the outside of the spherical
  circumference of the initial state of non-existence is quantized into chunks
  equal in size to the diameter of the state of non-existence.  Each of these
  chunks defines a "location", based on the definition of "location" as the
  position of a whole, or volume, relative to the edge of another whole, or
  volume (1).  That is, "location" is quantized.  Are each of these new
  instances of zero volume along the outside of the edge of the initial state
  of non-existence themselves wholes?  While they are not the whole amount of
  all volume everywhere due to the existence of the first state of zero
  volume, they are the whole amount of volume at those "locations".  That is,
  at that "location", the zero volume there is the whole amount or entirety of
  all volume.  This means that a second layer of wholes and, thus, a second
  layer of existent states of non-existence has been formed along the edge of
  the first state of non-existence.

o Each edge of each state of non-existence in the second layer also has an
  outside, which causes the formation of a third layer of new instances of
  zero volume and, thus, a third layer of new states of non-existence.  This
  process is repeated ad infinitum, causing an infinite set of states of
  non-existence to expand radially outward from an initial state of
  non-existence.

o While each state of non-existence may represent zero volume in absolute
  terms, each of these states is in a different location because the edges
  defining them are not overlapping.  Therefore, relative to one another, they
  take up non-zero volume.  Furthermore, relative to one another, these states
  of non-existence look as "real" to each other as two units/particles of what
  we call existence would look to one another.  Overall, a non-zero relative
  volume set of "real" looking units/particles (ie, "something") has been
  formed from an initial zero absolute volume state of non-existence (ie,
  "nothing").

Similarities of the above process to physics and cosmology as well as a way by
which it can form the basis of energy are discussed.  In sum, a mechanism for
the formation of the non-zero volume of our existence from the zero volume of
"non-existence" (ie, a mechanism for getting "something" from "nothing") is
presented.


Mechanism for the Expansion of the Zero Absolute Volume State of Non-Existence
into the Non-Zero Relative Volume of Existence


    A mechanism for the formation of the non-zero relative volume of our
existence from the zero absolute volume of "non-existence" (ie, a mechanism
for getting "something" from "nothing") is proposed here.  First, assume an
initial condition of zero volume as seen from our reference frame (ie,
observation point), or what is traditionally called non-existence.  Then:

o This zero volume is a whole, has an edge and exists.  Because it exists, it
  can also be called the state of non-existence.  A hypothetical observer that
  could see the wholeness, or edge of the state of non-existence would view
  this state as a sphere because the zero volume inside the edge is the same
  distance "across" as seen from all perspectives (2).  This is the definition
  of a sphere.

o Edges, by their very nature, have outsides.  What is outside the edge of the
  state of non-existence?  Because we assumed zero volume (ie, lack of volume)
  the only thing that can be outside the edge of the state of non-existence
  can be "more" zero volume (ie, more lack of volume).  Therefore, the edge has
  caused the formation of a new instance of zero volume all along its
  spherical outside.  Because there can be no distance smaller than the
  diameter of the state of non-existence, the zero volume along the outside of
  the spherical circumference of the initial state of non-existence is
  quantized into chunks equal in size to the diameter of the state of
  non-existence.  Each of these chunks defines a "location", based on the
  definition of "location" as the position of a whole, or volume, relative to
  the edge of another whole, or volume (1).  That is, "location" is
  quantized.  Are each of these new instances of zero volume along the outside
  of the edge of the initial state of non-existence themselves wholes?  While
  they are not the whole amount of all volume everywhere due to the existence
  of the first state of zero volume, they are the whole amount of volume at
  those "locations".  That is, at that "location", the zero volume there is
  the whole amount or entirety of all volume.  This means that a second layer
  of wholes and, thus, a second layer of existent states of non-existence has
  been formed along the edge of the first state of non-existence.

o Each edge of each state of non-existence in the second layer also has an
  outside, which causes the formation of a third layer of new instances of
  zero volume and, thus, a third layer of new states of non-existence.  This
  process is repeated ad infinitum, causing an infinite set of states of
  non-existence to expand radially outward from an initial state of
  non-existence.

      One way to visualize the ability of the initial "state" of non-existence
  to manifest itself in additional "locations" is to use the analogy of the
  concept, or picture, of a ball in one's mind.  Once one has an initial
  picture of a ball concept in one's mind, one can then ask oneself why the
  ball has to be "there", at that position, relative to the larger mindframe?
  The answer is is that it doesn't have to be "there".  Once "location" has
  been formed (by the very "existence" of the first ball concept in one's
  mindframe), one can visualize an infinite number of additional ball concepts
  outside that initial ball concept at other locations in the mindframe.  But,
  to start this process, the initial concept of a ball must be present in one's
  mind in order to define "location".  Because it does not yet exist in a
  larger set of other elements, the initial state of non-existence cannot be
  given a location or time stamp relative to these other elements and can,
  thus, be considered to be a locationless and timeless volume describing
  itself, that is, a concept (3).  And, just like the formation of an infinite
  set of balls in the mind given the presence of an initial ball concept, an
  infinite set of states of non-existence can be formed given an initial
  state, or concept, of non-existence.  However, instead of the mind asking
  why a concept has to be "there" and then forming new instances of it in
  additional locations, the mechanism causing formation of new instances of
  the state of non-existence is the formation of additional zero volume
  outside the edge of preceding states of non-existence.

o While each state of non-existence may represent zero volume in absolute
  terms, each of these states is in a different location because the edges
  defining them are not overlapping.  Therefore, relative to one another, they
  take up non-zero volume.  Furthermore, relative to one another, these states
  of non-existence look as "real" to each other as two units/particles of what
  we call existence would look to one another.  Therefore, overall, a non-zero
  relative volume set of "real" looking units/particles (ie, "something") has
  been formed from an initial zero absolute volume state of non-existence (ie,
  "nothing").

    In sum, a mechanism for the formation of the non-zero relative volume of
our existence from the zero absolute volume of "non-existence" (ie, a
mechanism for getting "something" from "nothing") is presented.


Characteristics of the Process in Which the Zero Absolute Volume State of
Non-Existence Expands into the Non-Zero Relative Volume of Existence


    The expansion of the zero absolute volume state of non-existence into the
non-zero relative volume of existence has some interesting characteristics and
similarities to physics and cosmology.  For instance:

o Symmetry Breaking: As described above, because it does not yet exist in a
  larger set of other elements, the initial state of non-existence cannot be
  given a location or time stamp relative to other elements and can, thus, be
  considered to be a locationless and timeless volume describing itself, that
  is, a concept (3).  As such, it would have all the properties of concepts
  discussed in a previous paper (3).  The lack of a location and time stamp
  gives this initial state of non-existence symmetry, at least with respect to
  location and time.  However, upon formation of additional instances of the
  state of non-existence, all these states, including the initial one, now
  exist in a set of more than one element and can thus be assigned location
  and time stamps relative to one another.  Rather than concepts, they are now
  location- and time-stamped volumes describing themselves, that is, simple
  ideas (3).  Due to the presence of these location and time stamps, one can
  now say that all these states of non-existence, including the initial one,
  are no longer symmetrical, at least with respect to location and time.
  Thus, in going from the initial state to multiple states of non-existence, a
  symmetry (with regard to location and time) has been broken.  It has been
  long suspected that a symmetry is broken during the early formation of the
  universe.  Perhaps, the change from a locationless and timeless initial
  state of non-existence to a location- and time-stamped set of states of
  non-existence is such a symmetry breaking.

o Similarities to the Big Bang Process: The process of expanding radially
  outward from a symmetrical, timeless, and locationless initial state of
  non-existence to a larger set of asymmetrical and location- and time-stamped
  states of non-existence is similar in form to the big bang process in
  cosmology in which an initial timeless, locationless singularity expands
  into a larger space-time (that is, a set of time and location stamps) and in
  which an initial, still unknown, symmetry is thought to be broken during the
  process.  Another similarity is that, just as with the big bang, once a
  larger set of states of non-existence has been formed, it is impossible to
  tell which was the original state because:

  - All the states of non-existence are identical

  - Expansion is occuring from all states of non-existence simultaneously due
    to the presence of all their edges and the outsides of their edges.

o Non-locality, the Observer-Observed Relationship and Time:  The wholeness,
  or edge, of the zero volume of non-existence does not have to be "formed"
  (ie, made via a multi-step process); instead, it is just a property of this
  zero volume that is there at any time that zero volume is there.  Once this
  edge is present, its outside and the new instances of zero volume along the
  outside also do not have to be "formed"; they are also just there at any
  time that the edge is there.  Additionally, once the second layer of
  instances of non-existence are present, their outsides and the third layer
  of new instances of zero volume do not have to be "formed"; they are just
  there once the second layer edges are there.  This process, which is
  repeated ad infinitum, is interesting in that:

  - It is sequential: The presence of each succeeding instance of the state of
    non-existence requires the presence of the preceeding instance and its
    edge.

  - It is instantaneous: The presence of each succeeding instance of the state
    of non-existence does not have to be "formed" in a multi-step sequence of
    events; instead, it is just instantly, or non-locally, there as a property
    of the preceeding layer.

  - It shows an observer-observed relationship: Quantum physics implies that
    objects do not exist until they are observed, but once observed,
    properties of distant objects can be tied together, or entangled,
    instantaneously.  Likewise, with the expansion of the state of
    non-existence, the succeeding states of non-existence (ie, the "observed")
    cannot exist until the initial state (ie, the "observer"), with its edge,
    exists.  But, once the initial state of non-existence exists, all of the
    succeeding, infinite number of states of non-existence instantaneously
    exist as "properties" of the initial state.

  In sum, this suggests that given an initial state of non-existence, an
  infinite set of additional states of non-existence can be formed
  instantaneously, or non-locally, in a manner similar to the
  observer-observed relationship in quantum physics.  Additionally, the
  sequential nature of this process may provide an explanation for the
  presence of time.  While each step in the process is instantaneous, and the
  formation of our universe does not appear to have been instantaneous, it is
  suggested that two instantaneous steps in a process would appear, relative
  to one another, as if they required the same, finite amount of time.  This
  would suggest that although the formation of our universe could be
  instantaneous in absolute terms, it would appear to take a finite amount of
  time to observers/states of non-existence within the universe.

o Similarity to null set expansion process: The zero volume of the state of
  non-existence is analagous to the nullness of the null set.  Set theorists
  consider the null set to exist (4).  It seems, therefore, that the zero
  volume of non-existence should also exist.  Furthermore, since one can
  obtain all the ordinals in a process of expansion of the null set (5) (Note:
  I'm not sure about this reference.  Sorry), it seems as if one should be
  able to obtain an infinite set of states of non-existence in an analagous
  process.

o Holographic Principle of String Theory: A paraphrasing of the holographic
  principle of string theory and its relationship to quantum gravity (6)
  says that "physical information inside any volume is encoded on the surface
  of that volume".  This is analogous to the idea that the "existence" and
  size of the state of non-existence, and indeed of any thing that exists, is
  encoded by its edge, or "surface".  The edge of the state of non-existence
  also encodes all the information needed to make new instances of the state
  of non-existence.

o Cahill and Klinger (7) have developed a model for the bootstrapped formation
  of space-time from random noise.  Chaitin (8) defines something as random
  "if it can't be compressed into a shorter description, if essentially you
  just have to write it out as it is.  In other words, there's no concise
  theory that produces it.".  That is, " A random truth has no explanation, it
  just is." (9).  By being "just is", a random truth seems to fit the
  definition for the state of non-existence, which "just is" due to its being
  a whole.  There is no thing besides non-existence that can explain
  non-existence, other than its wholeness.  If this "just is"ness of the state
  of non-existence is equivalent to a random truth, this implies that Cahill
  and Klinger's model could be similar to the model described here of the
  formation of space-time from the state of non-existence.

o In the model described above, the zero volume of the state of non-existence
  causes the formation of replicas of itself (at its outside edge).  This
  ability to replicate fits the definition of life.

    Overall, the expansion of the absolute zero volume state of non-existence
into the relative non-zero volume of existence has many interesting
similarities to physics and cosmology.


Where Does Energy Come From?

~
    The state of non-existence would be seen as spherical by a hypothetical
observer outside that state because zero volume is the same distance "across"
as seen from all directions (see above and (2)).  The zero volume formed along
the outside of the spherical circumference of the initial state of
non-existence is quantized into chunks, or locations, equal in size to the
diameter of the state of non-existence.  That is, "location" is quantized.
How many of these locations would be present around the initial, spherical
state of non-existence?  Well, around a great circle of a sphere, one can
perfectly fit six spheres of identical size to the initial sphere.  However,
consider two additional facts.  First, that there is no preferred great circle
around the initial, spherical state of non-existence.  Second that each state
of non-existence defines the smallest possible distance.  This second point
implies that one cannot infinitely subdivide the surface of the initial state
of non-existence to get other possible great circles.  Additional great
circles can be no closer than one-state-of-non-existence-diameter away from
any other great circle.  This suggests that if one considers the six states of
non-existence in a great circle, then the next closest locations for other
possible states of non-existence are just above and below those states in that
great circle.  Indeed, each of the six states of non-existence in a great
circle is also a member of another great circle perpendicular to the initial
great circle.  By my calculations, this leads to 18 "possible" locations for
states of non-existence around an initial spherical state of non-existence.
Because there is no preferred location, a state of non-existence should exist
at each of these 18 locations.  However, it is geometrically not possible to
fit 18 spheres around an inner sphere of identical size without compressing
those 18 spheres to a smaller size.  It is suggested that because each of
these 18 spherical states of non-existence must exist and yet there is not
enough room for them all, they will all be compressed, that is they will be
under pressure.  Pressure, or pushing out against things, is the basis of
energy.  Therefore, the model for the expansion of an initial state of
non-existence into additional states provides a natural explanation for the
presence of energy.
~


Conclusions


    The present paper proposes a mechanism for the expansion of the zero
absolute volume state of non-existence (ie, "nothing") into the non-zero
relative volume of existence (ie, "something").  That is, it proposes a
solution to the question in philosophy of why there is something rather than
nothing.  Briefly, it is suggested that the zero volume of non-existence is a
whole, with an associated edge or boundary, which is just the wholenss of this
zero volume.  The edge of the state of non-existence has an outside, like all
edges.  Because zero volume was assumed, there can only be zero volume (ie,
lack of volume) outside this edge.  Therefore, the edge forms new instances,
or locations, of zero volume all along its outside.  These new instances of
zero volume are themselves wholes with edges.  These new instances of zero
volume, or states of non-existence, in this "second layer" also have outsides
to their edges, which themselves form new instances of zero volume.  This
process continues until an infinite set of states of non-existence have been
formed, radiating outward from the initial state.  While each of these states
of non-existence represents zero volume in absolute terms, each state is in a
different location because the edges defining them are not overlapping.
Therefore, relative to one another, they take up non-zero volume.
Furthermore, these states of non-existence would look as "real", relative to
each other, as two units/particles of what we traditionally call existence
would look to one another.  Overall, a non-zero relative volume space has been
formed from the zero absolute volume of "non-existence".  It is suggested that
these states of non-existence are the fundamental building blocks, or quantum
units, of what we call existence.

    In standing with the idea that the state of non-existence is the
fundamental building block of what we call existence, the above process shows
several similarities to physics and cosmology as well as providing a mechanism
for the presence of energy.  For instance, it shows similarites to the big
bang process with its early symmetry breaking, non-locality, the
observer-observed relationship of quantum physics, the holographic principle
of string theory and time.

    While it is suggested here that a set of states of non-existence (ie, our
universe, or our existence) would appear, relative to one another, to occupy
non-zero relative volume, in absolute terms, the universe would still occupy
zero volume.  That is, if one could peel away the veneer of relative volume
and existence in our universe, there would still be absolute zero volume
underneath according to this model.

    If one wonders how it can be said that two states of non-existence can
bear any similarity to two units of existence, it is suggested here that the
difference between "state of non-existence" and "unit of existence" is
semantic only.  After all, since we have no idea what is "inside" elementary
particles, photons, etc., what is the difference between saying there is a
"state of non-existence" and "unit of existence" in there?  Both a "state of
non-existence" and a "unit of existence" are things that exist due to their
wholeness and associated edge, so they are really one and the same.


References

1. Proposed Definitions For the Terms "Existence", "Exists", "What Is", and
   "Location" http://www.geocities.com/roger846/theory.4.html, 2002.

2. Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?  Evidence that "Non-Existence"
   Can be Considered to "Exist",
   http://www.geocities.com/roger846/theory.5.html, 2002.

3. Ideas and Concepts and Their Relationships to "Real World" Objects,
   http://www.geocities.com/roger846/theory.3.html, 2001.

4. Devlin, K. The Joy of Sets: Fundamentals of Contemporary Set Theory, Second
   Edition, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1993.

5. von Neumann, J., Zur Einfuehrung der transfiniten Zahlen., Acta Sci.
   Math.  (Szeged), 1923, 1, pp. 199-208.

   Note: I'm not sure about the accuracy of this reference.  Sorry.

6. Green, M., Phys. World, 2000, 13(3), 21-22.

7. Cahill, R.T. and Klinger, C.M., Gen. Rel. Grav., 2000, 32, 529.

8. Chaitin, G.J., Complexity, 2000, 5(5),

9. Chown, M., New Scientist, Feb. 26, 2000.







Email: [email protected]



Copyright, 2002