[MD] tiny skull... change... nothingness...

[Ham Priday]

David, Chin, SA, Case and other nihilists --


I've just discovered a new website in which the author, Corey Kaup,
expounds a "General Nothingness Theory" which should interest you all.
Apparently it was inspired by a theologian, but Kaup's development is
scientific throughout, even accomodating the principles of quantum physics.
I've quoted part of the introductory section on 'Existential Nothingness'
which is pertinent to what we've been discussing:

"The impossibility of a beginning or end to time and space means that the
universe has and always will exist. Yet it has been observed that the
universe emerged from nonexistence fourteen billion years ago. The answer to
this riddle is that the universe actually emerged from 'undetectable
uniformity' - not nonexistence. This creates another paradox because it was
established earlier that if something is not detectable, it is not something
and it doesn't exist.

"Nothingness Theory accommodates this contradiction by distinguishing
between 'relative nonexistence' (nothingness) and 'absolute nonexistence'.
Nothingness is defined here as a state of perfectly uniform static
equilibrium constituting relative nonexistence. A state that exists relative
to absolute nonexistence but does not exist relative to temporal existence.
Absolute nonexistence is defined as the absence of existence, the absence of
nothingness, and the absence of absence. It is what is not being referred-to
under any circumstances. Its definition is that which cannot be referred-to,
named, or defined. It is the non-state to which everything including
nothingness is attracted.

"Despite the fact that referring to absolute nonexistence violates its
definition, it must be referred-to anyway. There are many paradoxical ideas
that must be dealt with in describing and modeling natural phenomena.
Infinity, for example, must be invoked to complete many equations and to
provide a complete view of complex behavior in natural systems. Yet infinity
is by definition not achievable. In this way absolute nonexistence provides
a frame of reference by which temporal existence can be better understood.

"Nothingness Theory defines temporal existence as the constraint of infinite
time and space within which human beings can exist. A state delineated from
nothingness by virtue of non-uniformity and whose components are attracted
to nothingness. It is the dynamic phase of existence whereas nothingness is
non-temporal and non-dynamic. Thus existence is the finite aspect of an
infinite process, the result of which is the detectable non-uniformity of
matter and space."

Kaup's thesis is brilliantly conceived in that he recognizes the necessity
of "non-uniformity" and "change" for "detection", by which he means
experience.  But you can see he cheats a little: he defines his Nothingness
as "relative nonexistence" as opposed to "absolute nonexistence", which
means he's really starting with "something" rather than "nothing".

The something he starts with is described as a "uniform static equilibrium
constituting relative nonexistence".  He doesn't tell us the components or
essence of this state -- whether it's energy or matter, but he stresses that
it must be "unstable" in order to exhibit dynamic properties -- yes, it
moves through time (his theory doesn't overcome temporality).  Invoking the
law of entropy, he says that the unidentified components of this state "are
attracted to nothingness"  So, in a sense, he's reversed the traditional
theory of something created from nothingness, suggesting instead that the
universe starts from "relative nonexistence" and moves toward the greater
stability of "absolute nonexistence" (i.e., pure nothingness).  At least,
that's what I make of it.  It's a theory of Nothingness -- sort of.

Anyway, the complete text can be accessed at www.nothingnesstheory.com .
You guys should find it fascinating.  Have a fun time!

Regards,
Ham