[N0B0DY]

I think it was RascalPuff who cited "Nothing begets nothing." A fair assessment I would say because change is an impossibility. The scientific vacuum isn't absolute, and if we put Dirac and Mandelbrot together we would perhaps get an Einstein with his relativity functioning infinitely.

If we start with causeless matter/energy that must be conserved, and particles are halved infinitely it will never become zero no matter how long the chain is. Yet, this proposition unavoidably creates a paradox of the real kind, which is proposing existence within non-existence. I call this highly illogical.

Conversely, if the absolute state never changes, but the state is understood as absolute speed - not "c" in free space - it forms the basis for relativity to function locally anywhere without paradox through a reduction in that absolute speed.

We then have to ask ourselves how speed can possibly be reduced if there is no such thing as space, time, this, that, etc.. It is reduced only through the abstract perspectives of non-existence: one is expansive through division - which doesn't literally change the absolute state; and the other is contractive through multiplication - which doesn't literally change the absolute state. The former creates spacetime incrementally allowing abiogenesis, mutation, and evolution to occur through time; and the latter provides the motionless medium.

Another way to consider it is through considering the time it takes you, light, and the absolute universe to reach the sun. The absolute perspective can't include space and time because there is no time to judge space, and there is no space to cover through time.