I also find it hillarious that you claim to be a mathematician yet have no idea about fundamental truths in physics which I mentioned earlier. This must be a parody.

The big bang was not an explosion that occurred at some point within a pre-existing void, but a simultaneous expansion of space itself. — Illuminati

Yes. That's how cosmologists typically describe the Big Bang. But it's easier for ordinary humans to picture it as a metaphorical explosion of something from nothing : perhaps a "pre-existing void" of un-actualized Potential, similar to vacuum energy.

Besides, it's difficult for us to imagine anything in the absence of Space-Time as a background against which to measure it. The BB theory is an attempt to describe "the beginning of space, time, matter, and energy as we know them".

In the Everything image below, the flash of light is the BB, and the expanding time-cone --- segment of a sphere --- is space-time-matter-energy-as-our-material-bodies-know-them. The black background could be No-thing/No Distinction, or it could be One-Infinite-Zero, or it could be the saucy abode of the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster ; since we have no way of knowing what might exist outside the boundaries of space-time-matter-energy. But we can conjecture from what we do know. How do you know? :joke:

cosmic singularity for anyone interested. — Illuminati

A common definition of the Singularity*1 describes it as-if all the matter & energy of our present universe was compressed into a sub-atomic spec of space-time, hence "infinite density" stuff with no empty space, and no room for motion or change. Again, most of us can only imagine such a concept in space-time-matter terms. In the Singularity Graph below, the actual vs possible area under-the-red-line-but-outside-the-box is also outside of space-time, hence immeasurable & unknowable . . . . except by pure speculation of what's Possible. Which depends on your definition of Potential.

But. for my Information-theoretic thesis, I like to describe the Singularity as a computer program for the evolution of a physical universe. The contents of the Singularity are immaterial non-dimensional Information, i.e. abstract ideas or mathematical ratios. Presumably, the source of that Information was a Programmer, existing only in a Platonic sense outside of the space-time bubble "as we know it". Of course, that's only a metaphor or allegory derived from human experience with a finite material world : as we know it. :smile:


*1. The ontological status of the cosmological singularity, a concept within the Big Bang theory, is a topic of ongoing debate. It refers to the initial state of the universe, where density and spacetime curvature are thought to be infinite. While mathematically described, its physical reality and implications for our understanding of the universe are unclear, especially concerning the validity of physical laws at that point
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=The+Ontological+Status+of+the+Cosmological+Singularity


EVERYTHING FROM NOTHING


SINGULARITY GRAPH

↪jgill
I also find it hillarious that you claim to be a mathematician yet have no idea about fundamental truths in physics which I mentioned earlier. This must be a parody. — Illuminati

You mean the sacred nature of OIZ ? This is a fundamental truth? This sounds more like a cult.

One can appreciate the theories about the origins of the universe without worshiping them.

You keep finding ways to prove that you are not a mathematician/scientist but a parrot.

I said that the universe in the beggining had no time and space, you said thats my own theory while that is commonly agreed upon. Im not even going to waste a single moment proving to you why. As a mathematician you should know.

Quoting my question just in case you forgot

As a mathematician, how would you formally account for the emergence of spatial structure within an entity that is dimensionless? Specifically, how can space, as a relational or metric construct, arise from a foundational state that lacks extension, orientation, or measurable attributes? — Illuminati

I also said that the universe started from something that we cant measure, also stands as a point, you answered that this is my imagination as well.

And now your latest claim is

You mean the sacred nature of OIZ ? This is a fundamental truth? This sounds more like a cult.

One can appreciate the theories about the origins of the universe without worshiping them. — jgill

Is this based on your years of supposed experience in the field of mathematics or your supposed understanding of Metaphysics and the One? If I were you I would not respond unless it makes sense the next time you do and it is not off topic, dont forget that you are currently in: /Metaphysics and epistemology and my post is on the One, not a cult, not a poem, and definitelly not based on a limited capacity to comprehend ideas such as exhibited by you and others.

Information-theoretic thesis — Gnomon

EVERYTHING FROM NOTHING — Gnomon

You cant have something from nothing.

If I were you I would not respond unless it makes sense the next time you do and it is not off topic, dont forget that you are currently in: /Metaphysics and epistemology and my post is on the One, not a cult, not a poem, and definitelly not based on a limited capacity to comprehend ideas such as exhibited by you and others. — Illuminati

From the exchanges of insults, I see that you are becoming frustrated by the incomprehension of your unconventional ideas on a forum of philosophers & mathematicians. I can relate. Some of my attempts to explain the reasoning & inferring underlying my unorthodox Enformationism thesis also meet with shrugs of nescience.

As long as I stick to established concepts of Physics, the dialog flows both ways. But when the discussion branches off into Meta-Physics, the communication tends to go off-track. That's where I rely on my online Glossary to provide relevant definitions of what I'm saying, that may not be found in dictionaries & encyclopedias. But, of course, they have no academic or scientific credentials to give them an air of authority.

I suppose that one reason for the disconnect is that modern Philosophy is more strongly influenced by immanent Materialism than transcendent Metaphysics, and by the authority of modern Naturalists than by ancient masters of the Supernatural. My own limited knowledge of philosophy skips-over most of the Post-platonic ideas and picks-up again with 20th century topics. So, except for Plato & Aristotle, I am mostly ignorant of the Ancient Masters.

Obviously, you have given the "OIZ" concept a lot of thought and research. But, as you said, "The One Infinite Zero is indeterminate & ineffable". Which makes it difficult to define & express in conventional terms. . . . even technical philosophical terms . . . . which have been debated for millennia. So, all I can advise is to keep plugging-away (american idiom) at it. Even though I don't understand some of your inferences from the OIZ axiom, I have a general interest in such ineffable & transcendent topics. :smile:

You cant have something from nothing. — Illuminati

Yes, I know. But logically you can have the emergence of something Actual from the statistical possibilities of timeless spaceless mathematical Potential*1. :nerd:

PS___ Materialism assumes that Actual Stuff has always existed, so no need for un-actualized Potential. But that metaphysical axiom is not falsifiable or verifiable. Since the BB theory calculated that everything in the universe was originally stuffed into a spaceless dimensionless mathematical point, the calculations sailed over the edge of finite reality into the abyss of Infinity : the transcendent realm of timeless entities like numbers, existing in the dimensionless gap between Zero and One. Nothing spooky about that non-existent innumerable notion. :joke:


*1. Potential :
Unrealized or unmanifest creative power. For example the Voltage of an electric battery is its potential for future current flow measured in Amps. Potential is inert (and non-existent) until actualized by some trigger. In the Enformationism metaphor, the real world was originally an idea in the Mind of G*D, with the infinite possibilities of Omniscience, that was realized by an act of Will.
https://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page16.html
Note --- My ineffable "G*D"*2 may be roughly equivalent to your "OIZ".

*2. G*D :
An ambiguous spelling of the common name for a supernatural deity. The Enformationism thesis is based upon an unprovable axiom that our world is an idea in the mind of G*D. This eternal deity is not imagined in a physical human body, but in a meta-physical mathematical form, equivalent to Logos. Other names : ALL, BEING, Creator, Enformer, MIND, Nature, Reason, Source, Programmer, Potential. The eternal Whole of which all temporal things are a part is not to be feared or worshipped, but appreciated like Nature.
I refer to the logically necessary and philosophically essential First & Final Cause as G*D, rather than merely "X" the Unknown, partly out of respect. That’s because the ancients were not stupid, to infer purposeful agencies, but merely shooting in the dark. We now understand the "How" of Nature much better, but not the "Why". That inscrutable agent of Intention is what I mean by G*D.
https://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page13.html
Note --- If you imagine that eternal Potential as something like ideal mathematical Logic, it would have no need for human emotions that arise from the limitations of finite beings in an ever-changing reality.

Chaos (lack of distinction, not deterministic)
Simplicity (One thing which is composed of itself)
0 dimensional entity (Distances are not real-Ill get to that in a sec)
the big bang (beggining of Two, or the great split)
The One (lack of distiction, Chaos, infinite, simple and unique)

The universe cannot expand "outward" because, according to physics, there is no external reference point or boundary outside of it. The universe is not expanding into a pre-existing space; rather, space itself is stretching. This means that distances between points within the universe are increasing, but there is no external space into which it expands. Thus space is not made of actual space.

If the universe is stretching the way physics describe(not outwards but "inwards"), space is not composed of space but rather the effect of phenomena on matter. — Illuminati

I'm just throwing some ideas out there, into the Aether, to see if any might stick :

#A. "pre-existing space" : Space-Time is not a real thing, but an imaginary geometric model that scientists use to understand Change. Since it is Ideal, scientists can extend the model timeline into the future or the past {image below}.

#B. "space itself is stretching" I assume this is a metaphor, as-if space is an elastic substance. Space is not a material substance that could stretch & warp, but the infinite Causal Potential that makes the local Matter Effect possible?

#C. "effect of phenomena" : As you put it : space is the conceived effect of sensable phenomena, such as Matter, relative to other Matter, or that is changing its size or location. But apparently, the Cause of the effect is undifferentiated Chaos that voluntarily begins to differentiate its infinite Potential into multiple space-time Actual Things. If so, then Chaos possesses Will-power*1 or Causal Power, Desire, Inclination, Choice???

#D. "space is not made of actual space" : Not a metaphor, but a mystery. So, what is formless empty nothingness made of : Aether*2? Traditionally Chaos = randomness or nothingness or void. As you said "not deterministic", so is Chaos pure Chance? Without the willpower to choose, anything that can happen will happen??? Is space made from the causal willpower we call Energy/Change? :smile:

*1. Will :
"Schopenhauer identifies the thing-in-itself — the inner essence of everything — as will: a blind, unconscious, aimless striving devoid of knowledge"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_as_Will_and_Representation
Note --- Is "OIZ" similar to Schopenhauer's Will : more like a physical Force than a metaphysical G*D?

*2. Aether :
(or ether) can refer to the ancient Greek concept of the pure upper air breathed by gods, the personification of this sky deity, or a discredited scientific theory of a space-filling medium for light.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=aether
In the 21st century, the "aether" concept reappears in physics, not as the 19th-century luminiferous medium, but as the Einstein ether, a framework exploring a space-filling medium compatible with Einstein's theories that could potentially explain dark matter/energy.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=21st+century+aether
Note --- Not the Fifth Element, but the Only Substance (Aristotle/Spinoza)

SPACE-TIME BEFORE & AFTER BIG BANG