[zeroca]

Originally Posted by Fredrick Science itself has limitations. This is, for instance, the affirmation of the importance of the observer. By examining an environment, the examination itself changes the environment. Therefore the examination takes place in a changing environment, and not in an original environment.

Hello Fredrick!
The quatation above is from your site.
I’m very pressed for time and so far I looked through the first five chapters of your site. I’m not mathematician, but enjoyed your analysis about prime natural numbers. My approach to origin of universe and the role of zero in it is more simple and practical. I’ll try to be as brief as can.
As I mentioned in introduction, being innocent, I was on all union search during the period of USSR for not submitting to the verdict of Supreme Court of Georgian Socialist Republic, which itself was one of the consisting republics of USSR. My photographs were hung up at police stations. Being innocent wasn’t enough and as I had to survive, so I tried to find some mechanism or system, which would help me to avoid unrighteous sentence and to change my environment positively against the verdict, which was of all union scale as well. After a consideration nothing as a conception appeared in my mind.
As we mentioned, it’s useless to look for the “place” where nothing exists, or to build a laboratory to detect it, or to argue with others about it.
My approach was very simple: I didn’t care about the origin of the universe, i.e. was it actually created from nothing, or was it created after Big Bang, or does it exist permanently in 3-D space within the time, but. . .
If this universe really was born from nothing, then every creature in this universe and the universe itself must contain the code of it even presently and there must exist a system or mechanism based on it. . .
To say briefly such a system really exists. It had been used by ancestors of mankind for harmonization of the universe. The mentioned by you Lao Tse, Buddha, Sufis, and lot of other persons knew about it. No need to recite all persons.
I called the system “Active zero”, then set it up and made an experiment.
Generally, despite the fact that it isn’t possible to create precise conditions for experiment, the latter must be considered as most important method and its results could be successful in case of proper approach and analysis.
Let’s take for example the simplest experiment about gravity: if we flip a little pebble to the air, it will fall to the surface of the Earth. If we repeat it 1000 times the results will be the same in spite of the fact that the conditions of experiment change (the pebble changes, it’s not the same as in the first moment of flipping), and the environment of experiment changes as well every minute, and observers as well change. Some people believe that the 1.pebble strives to the center of planet, but some of them think that 2.the earth is expending and so striving to pebble. Both assertions are equivalent from the position of theory, but main part of mankind chose the first one, because it’s flexible and acceptable practically, i.e. changing of conditions of experiment in our case doesn’t reflect on the result. That means that successfully chosen conditions of experiment will give good results (Generally it’s too difficult to prove anything to anybody, not because of the weakness of arguments, but because various people think differently and all of them believes himself to be right. Such is the reality. Chances to find thinker similar to you are too small. for example try to prove to the dog that the Earth is spherical. You could not manage. The main obstacle is that the dog does not understand it)
After the first positive result I practiced the system “Active zero” for 10 years (1987-97) with lot of positive (but with some negative results as well).
Right now I intend to set it up for restoration of ozone layer as an experiment and looking for interested partner.
Do you think that if an experiment with the system (that’s based on zero) gives positive results, would it be the proving argument that this universe arose from nothing?