[zeroca]

According to my theory nothing - zero plays fundamental, principal part. I think that before arising of the universe there didn’t exist anything, i.e. only nothing existed before the birth of the world.

Generally I think that nobody can prove anything to anybody, so despite my being very convinced in my theory, I prefer it to be produced as based on an assumption.

At the beginning let’s call the initial, starting stage of arising of universe “Big Bang” as everybody does it.

So I don’t think that any materialization existed just before Big Bang. The term “Big Bang” doesn’t mean anything like bang. I think it’s only introduced to emphasize “the process that takes place “everywhere simultaneously”.

If there didn’t exist anything, it means that there didn’t exist even two different eternally small points, as the space and time didn’t exist (“nonexistence” didn’t take place within time and space). When we say that the process began from some center it doesn’t mean that this center really existed and it had size. We probably want to figure to ourselves how the process of existence started. According to me we mustn’t think that such state took place in an empty 3-D space, I definitely emphasize that 3-D space didn’t exist. As nothing is homogeneous, it means that it’s equal or rather the same in its “different places”, so we can figure it as one center, but it doesn’t mean that this imaginable center is any kind of accumulation of energy.

So I repeat: nothing existed before arising of the world and arising of the world is the process of separation of nothing into two equal opposite parts.

Let’s assume that it was really so, i.e. nothing existed before arising of the world: nothing means – no 3-D space, no time, no existing changes, no existing motion, i.e. complete, thorough quiescence. Let’s call it – “existence of nothing in itself”, so only nothing in itself existed before Big Bang.
How long lasted such state - existence of nothing in itself without separation? We can’t say that such state lasted even infinitely small fraction of the second, or even lasted, because such state didn’t happen within time - to say figuratively: as time didn’t exist, no matter how long such state lasted: “millions of years”, or “infinitesimal part of second” and if any “changes” are expected, they must happen at once.

But a question arises: Are really any changes expected within nothing? Or rather has nothing any possibility of change? I definitely think that only kind of change that’s possible within it is its separation, splitting, dividing into two equal opposite phenomenon. I’m really not obtruding my theory on you, but all phenomenons in universe exists based on a duality, and hardly anyone can cite the event, which hasn’t got its opposite (except for nothing itself, that’s only phenomenon, which’s single, absolute, unique... i.e. to say briefly there isn’t the second zero, but only one…)

For instance:

3D-space: Up - down, left - right, front - back, inside – outside; center – periphery;

Time: before – after, i.e. past – future and vice versa;

Misfortune – happiness;
Consolidation – rarefaction;
Friend – enemy;
Man – woman;
Left eye – right eye;
Love – hatred;
Male – female;
Cold – warm… etc.

Or into two equal opposite processes, distributed within time:

Day – night;
Summer – winter;
Spring – autumn;
Prosperity – adversity;
As you sow, so shall you reap;
To kill in present life – to be killed in the future life;
To be a prosecutor in present life – to be prosecuted in a future life; I.e. the after-effects, the consequences of Karma…

How can I prove that’s really so?

I think that if the sum of opposite equal phenomenon is zero, it means that zero can be a possible container of opposite equal phenomenon, i.e. zero contains in itself the possibility of separation.

I myself call mentioned quality of nothing – weakness, against of the quality – steadfastness.

Steadfastness can be called the quality of the event the probability of which equals to 1. (For instance, probability of falling out of six on a dice, on each side of which is inscribed six), but the weakness – the quality of the event the probability of which is less than 1, in our case equals to 0.5 (I.e. zero has two alternatives: either to stay undivided or to become separated)
As the first condition of nothing doesn’t last inside the time, so separation happens at once.

The question; what forced nothing to separation, to splitting? I.e. what was the initial impulse, or impact? - can be answered, that as from two alternatives of nothing (to stay undivided, or to stay separated) the first doesn’t last within the time, then nothing automatically “chooses” the second, because nothing “isn’t waiting for some period to pass”, because there isn’t any period (as time doesn’t exist), i.e. weakness of nothing is contained in its probability of change and its un-separated condition sporadically turns into its separated one, so to say briefly

Nothing included in itself the code of arising of the world and there hadn’t been any need in “forcing it from the outside”.

The turning of this universe from present state into nothing again can be called - a Big Annihilation, but it has very small credibility, since for fading away of this universe a simultaneous neutralization of all opposite phenomenon is required, but anyway small credibility of annihilation doesn’t exclude its possible incoming occurrence some day.

So according to my theory so called “Big Bangs” are alternated with “Big Annihilations” in succession, i.e. world arising is followed by its dying.

The fading away of universe can be called as interruption of existence of universe. I repeat that during the interruption 3-D space, gravity, distance, time, motion - fade away and as interruption doesn’t last inside the time, so any previously existed universe turns into following one at once, i.e. we can say that this universe (the truth with cessations) exists permanently in the space inside the time, since those interruptions (each of them) don’t last inside the time.

The process of separation within nothing (i.e. the Big Bang) at once is accompanied by simultaneous arising of 3-D space and time; Why?

I think it is regularity, since the separation means the change, i.e. the existence of difference, i.e. existence of at least two different points, and to characterize two different locations the space is needed at once.
Three inter-perpendicular directions are enough for that, i.e. the space presents 3 conventional parameters of localization, i.e. localizational parameters of motion.

The time as well doesn’t exist on its own, but it’s needed to characterize the change, i.e. not only two different locations, but two different conditions as well (figuratively: the cold today - the warm tomorrow, day and night, summer and winter at a certain intervals).

Time presents itself no more than successional parameter of motion.
Finally I can say that general rule of world arising consists in separation of nothing into two opposite equal phenomenon, or into two opposite equal processes with simultaneous arising of 3-D space and time, as attributes of motion; and world fading away is the process of complete annihilation of universe with synchronous fading away of 3-D space and time.