“Nothing” (the origin of “everything”?), energy, matter and dark energy within the Epistemologically Different Worlds (EDWs) perspective

In this short article, in the first part, I introduce several principles of the Epistemologically Different Worlds (EDWs) perspective referring to the material things. Then, I will indicate that the origin of everything is, as many physicists presuppose, “nothing”. However, I mention that the “nothing” from the EDWs perspective is something quite different from the common notion of “nothing”. In the next parts, I will shortly present the notions of “energy”, the Big Bangs and matter, dark matter, mind and brain (the observers) within the EDWs perspective.

► The EDWs perspective: The notion of the Universe/world is replaced with the EDWs and the “nothing” is, in fact, the first EW, the EW0 or the Hypernothing within our EDWs perspective.[1] Let me introduce the six principles concerning the physical objects, their interactions and the relationship between the EDWs:

1. Epistemologically different interactions constitute epistemologically different objects, and epistemologically different objects determine epistemologically different interactions.
2. Any object exists only at “the surface”, due to the interactions that constitute it.
3. Any object exists in a single EW and interacts only with the objects from the same EW.
4. Any EW (a set of objects and their interactions) appears from and disappears into nothing.
5. Any EW is, therefore all the EDWs share the same objective reality, even if one EW does not exist for any other EDW.
6. One EW does not exist for any EDW.[2]

These principles indicates the existence of all the epistemologically different entities which belong to the EDWs, like the electromagnetic waves (the field-EW), the microparticles (the micro-EW) and the macro-objects (the macro-EW). The entities/processes of one EW correspond to the epistemologically different (ED) entities/processes which belong to the EDWs. There are certain phenomena from a particular EW which can be explained only by appealing to their correspondences to the ED phenomena which belong to the EDWs. The macro-objects from the macro-EW correspond to the ED entities from the micro-EW, one EW isn’t for any EDW, but without the appearance of the micro-EW, the macro-EW could not had appeared. However, the macro-entities (the macro-EW) do not exist for the microentities (the micro-EW), the microentities do not exist for the macro-objects. The same assertion is available for the relationship between the electromagnetic waves (the field-EW) and the microparticles (the micro-EW), for instance.

► “Everything from nothing”[3]: The first EW was the Hypernothing (the EW0), i.e. a kind of “nothing”. Through the correspondence to the “nothing” (the EW0), the EW1 and the EW-1 were revealed.[4] The equation is the following: EW-1 + EW1= EW0 (“nothing”).[5] In the same place, at the same time, there were both the EW-1 and the EW1 which corresponded to the Hypernothing, but the EW-1 does not exist for the EW1. We furnish here a kind of Parmenides’ viewpoint (related to Heraclitus’ viewpoint): the EW1/EW-1 corresponded to the Hypernothing, but from the viewpoint of the EW0, together the EW1 and the EW-1 represented “nothing”. Obviously, each EDW does not exist for the EW0, but from a “neutral viewpoint”, together the EW1 and the EW-1 are “nothing”, even if each of these EDWs just correspond to the EW0. In other words, “nothing has changed” inside the Hypernothing (the EW0), i.e., “nothing” always remains unchanged. Certain changes happened only inside the EW1 and the EW-1 (these EDWs were revealed), but not inside the EW0. Without the EW0, the EW1 and the EW-1 could have not appeared, but there were only the correspondences between the EW0 and those two EDWs. All the EDWs have been just indirectly revealed (through the correspondences of the EW0 which does not exist for any EDW).[6] Because of such correspondences, we do not need an external force which produces the “appearance” of any EW. Again, inside the EW0, “nothing happened” in order the EW1/EW-1 to be revealed. The “beginning” of a particular EW is inside of that EW, there is not any “external Big Bang” to an EW. Between the EW0 and the EW1/EW-1 there was no “direct causality”, but only certain correspondences, since there was no “inside” or “outside” the EW0. In the Hypernothing, nothing could happen. There was no broken law of energy conservation. Each EW has its origin inside of itself, but there has to be a correspondence to the previous EW, other previous EDWs and finally to the EW0.

Obviously, the Hypernothing is not Aristotle’s “Prime Motor” (even if his “motor” was “unmoved”). For us, the Hypernothing is not even “unmoved”, it is something beyond “moved-unmoved” distinction (beyond any distinction available for the ED entities/processes which belong to the EDWs). The EW0 is the Hypernothing and nothing else. Again, something can happen only within an EW, but not within the EW0, since this EW is “nothing” and nothing else. We could think that a kind of “Prime motor” takes place in each EW, not in the EW0. Also, a “Prime motor” could not even exist for the EW0, otherwise, “today” would have already been in the past. Even if one EW does not exist for an EDW, the correspondences between the ED entities/laws impose certain new “qualities” or “features” to some of the ED entities which can be explained only based on such correspondences. In some cases, there are some new ED phenomena or even new EDWs which are just revealed not produced (see below).

The Hypernothing hyperis an EW, therefore, in principle, it is quite impossible for a human being to be an “observer” of the EW0 (not even indirectly – as the human being can observe, indirectly, certain ED entities which belong to some of the EDWs). The EW0 is the Hypernothing with its hyperontology. What does it mean this “hyperontology”? The Hypernothing is “nothing” and its corresponding ED “manifestations”, i.e., the EDWs. There was not a separation of “matter” and “anti-mater” (as many physicists have believed), nothing would have a hyperontology (it means, nothing would be “superior” to something), while the ED ontologies would be something inferior to “nothing”, all the EDWs would correspond to the EW0. From the viewpoint of Hypernothing, we are “nothing”, we do not exist. This is the reason, in all the EDWs, nothing could “exist” eternally: the “existence” is something “inferior” to nonexistence, “something which exist” is inferior (ontologically speaking) to the Hypernothing. Any “something” is, indirectly through correspondence, a “perturbation” of the Hypernothing, exactly as a microparticle (the micro-EW) is a “perturbation” of an electromagnetic field (the field-EW). Without such perturbations, the microparticles would not even exist. The EW1 and EW-1 did not appear as a result of some “perturbations” of the EW0, since “nothing” could have changed in the EW0. The EW1 and the EW-1 were revealed only for us as indirect observers, but not produced. Certain “perturbations” could take place only in each EW, but not in the EW0. Again, “Why is there something rather than nothing?”, I answer: we, as observers, can notice that “somethings” (perturbations) are only within the EDWs, “nothing” is the Hypernothing which, finally, corresponds to all the EDWs. If we add the signs of all the ED entities from the EDWs, we need to get “nothing”, since all the EDWs have corresponded to the Hypernothing (which has no sign, since it is “nothing”), but these EDWs have been revealed for us (as indirect observers) not produced in correspondences to the EW0. From the EW0’s viewpoint, the “existence” is negative, it is something “missing”. Also, the existence corresponds to a “perturbation” of something from an EDW. For the existence of the first EW, the EW1, it was necessary the EW-1 to exist (EW0 = EW1 + EW-1 which means EW1 = EW0 – EW-1). Nevertheless, the EW1 and the EW-1 existed only for us as indirect observers in the past since in reality there was only the EW0! In other words, “the EW1 is” (for us) just because “something” is missing, indirectly through correspondence, from “nothing” (the Hypernothing, the EW0): it is “missing” (through correspondence) the EW-1. For instance, a particle exists just because there is a corresponding “perturbation” of the electromagnetic wave/field. Without this perturbation, the microparticle would not exist. There are the ED processes (missing something for the appearance of the EW1; the perturbation of a field for the existence of a microparticle; the accumulation of microparticles which correspond to the appearance of a macroparticle) which correspond to the appearance of the ED entities. I emphasize that there are no “rules/laws” for such processes. In reality, these processes are quite aleatory, accidentally, exactly as the appearances of the EDWs are accidentally, for us as indirect observers. More exactly, the processes of the revealing of the EDWs is an aleatory process exactly as it is the appearance of animals species on the Earth. The processes of revealing of the EDWs are, for us as indirect observers, spontaneously appearances of the ED entities/processes and their interactions. In general, the revealing of “something” is something “negative” in the relationship with the previous EDW. The creation of “first entities” (which belong to a particular EW, let call it the EW1) would be something negative in relationship to the phenomenon which belonged to a previous the EDW; it would be the EW0. “Negative” is given by the “perturbations”, “discrepancies”, “disturbances” of certain parts of the EW in relationship with the entire EW. The perturbations/discrepancies are against the uniformity of an EW. An entity, a microparticle, corresponds to a discrepancy of a small part of the electromagnetic wave/field in relationship with the entire wave/field (which it has its uniformity[7]). For us as observers, from nothing (the EW0), something is “missing”, in order certain entities (the EW1 and the EW-1) to appear for us as observers, but this “missing” belongs to the “conditions of possibility” of existence, not to the EW0 (since “nothing could change” in the EW0). For us as observers, the spontaneously processes of revealing the EW1 and the EW-1 happened accidentally and both these processes of revealing corresponded to the EW0. (There was not a Big Bang (a ‘trigger’) which started the existence of the EW1 and the EW-1.) This “correspondence” means that nothing changed in the EW0 with the revealing of the EW1 and the EW-1 (nothing could chance in the EW0). The uniformity of the EW0 (i.e., nothing) was not perturbed by the spontaneously processes of revealing the EW1 and the EW-1. The processes of revealing the EW1 and EW-1 were embodied in their “self-organization” (which “belongs” to the EW1 and the EW-1) out of “nothing”, and this “self-organization” just corresponded to the Hypernothing. The spontaneous processes of revealing certain EDWs out of “nothing” (at one “moment”) have corresponded to the Hypernothing-EW. Through correspondences, the ED “pseudo-variations” of EW0 are just the “spontaneous revealings” of the EW1 and the EW-1. There were pseudo-“variations” of the EW0 since nothing could change in the Hypernothing. There were not appearances from/in/at the EW0 since the EW1 and the EW-1 did not exist for the EW0. The EW1 and the EW-1 existed in themselves (for us as observers, since for the EW0 these EDWs did not exist). The EW2 could appeared through the correspondence to the EW1, but the EW2 corresponded to certain variations of the EW1. The EW1 was only the corresponding ED “pseudo-variations” of nothing, but “pseudo” indicate nothing changed in the Hypernothing. So, in the above part, using the EDWs perspective, I showed that everything (the ED entities/processes from all the EDWs) appeared through correspondences to the Hypernothing.

► Energy: Everybody knows energy is the capacity to do work; energy (like the electromagnetic field always with speed c in the field-EW) is not a “matter” like the table in front of me (even if Planck introduced his quanta). However, the corresponding particles (like photons and electrons) are really matter (microparticles in the micro-EW) which correspond to the table (matter from the macro-EW) in front of me. Energy is the capacity do to work (to do something) just because this energy (the electromagnetic field) has naturally the speed c, this energy is the speed c, and any kind of “energy” or entity corresponds, somehow, to the electromagnetic field. Energy is neither be created nor be destroyed, since energy is either the electromagnetic field (speed c, and this field is not created by Big Bangs but revealed, indirectly, for us as indirect observers) or “nothing” (from the EDWs) which corresponds to the field-EW. But this field corresponds to the anti-field (the anti-field-EW) and, together, these two EDWs represent nothing (if we suppose, there was nothing before the Big Bangs). “Gravity” travels with the speed c just because it corresponds to the electromagnetic field (speed c) (and not because gravity is the curvature of “spacetime”, since space and time or spacetime cannot have any ontological status). All the ED entities have their ED energies which correspond to the electromagnetic field (the field-EW). The photons have the energy of speeding c because they correspond to the electromagnetic field (speed c). The complex entities (the living organisms) have their proper energy; any EW (and its set of ED entities) has its owner energy which corresponds, finally, to the field-EW.

► The Big Bangs and matter: All the “matter” did not appear from the Big Bangs.[8] In reality, for us as indirect observers, 13.82 billions years ago, the Big Bangs represented the beginning of revealing/uncovering the first parts of the electromagnetic field (the field-EW[9]).[10] (There has not been any “expansion” of the space/Universe.) This revealing has been a continuously process until today and it will continue in the future. The revealing process of the electromagnetic field from the field-EW was not the “producing” of this field from “nothing”. The electromagnetic field has always been there in the field-EW (there has been no “time” for the electromagnetic field with speed c), but, if we consider that, before the Big Bangs, there was “nothing”, together with the anti-field-EW, for us as indirect observers, these two EDWs represented nothing, i.e., the EW0. Therefore, with the EDWs perspective, we exclude the idea that the entire “matter” appeared from an infinitesimal point (from “nothing”) as a result of the “Big Bang”. The matter of the electromagnetic field (the field-EW) has been continuously revealing, the beginning of this process of uncovering the electromagnetic field was produced by those Big Bangs, a process of revealing which has happened until today. If we consider that, before the Big Bangs, there was “nothing”, the electromagnetic field has not been produced from nothing, but it has been uncovering in correspondence to the anti-field-EW. The uncovering of the electromagnetic field corresponded, later, to the appearances of the microparticles (the micro-EW) which corresponded, later, to the appearances of the planets (the macro-EW). For us as indirect observers, all the micro-entities and the macro-objects (and human beings) are the results of this “chain-of-correspondences” (for us as observers): the electromagnetic field (the field-EW)-the microparticles (the micro-EW)-the macroparticles (the macro-EW). The electromagnetic waves, the microparticles and the macroparticles have been the results of the revealing (not the producing “out of nothing”) of the electromagnetic field (the field-EW), but in the same place, at the same time, there have been the anti-field-EW, and for us as observers, through correspondences, these two EDWs have always represented “nothing”, i.e., the EW0. Therefore, from the viewpoint of the Hypernothing (the EW0), all the matters (the electromagnetic field, the microparticles and the macroparticles) did not exist at all, everything has always been “nothing” until now just because of the anti-matter (the anti-field-EW).[11] Anyway, we, the human beings, and all the ED entities do not exist for the EW0, since “nothing” (i.e., the EW0) has always remains nothing and nothing else. From the Hyperverse’s viewpoint, the so-called “Big Bangs” did not happen. For the EW0 (or for us), the Big Bangs did not happen, the Hypernothing remained nothing and nothing else.[12] The Big Bangs (i.e., the start of revealing the electromagnetic field) “happened” only for the electromagnetic field (the field-EW), but, as we emphasized above, for us (as indirect observers), there was just a process of revealing the electromagnetic field[13] (the field-EW) (not of “producing” it out of “nothing”) in correspondence to the anti-field-EW.[14] Neither the electromagnetic field (the field-EW) nor the anti-field-EW[15] did exist for the EW0 (these EDWs, like any EW, exist in themselves). Also, the human beings do not exist for the EW0, we are just “illusions” for this EW. Nothing has changed within the EW0, the Big Bangs did not exist for the EW0.[16] Anyway, there is that chain-of-correspondences (not “causalities”) from the field-EW to the micro-EW, the macro-EW and the life-EW: for instance, for us as indirect observers, without the field-EW, the macro-EW would not have existed, even if the field-EW did not exist for the macro-EW. For us as indirect observers, the chain of correspondences rejects the chain of causalities, the “passing of time” and the “history of the Universe”. Within the unicorn world, the “history” of each human being has been extrapolated to the “history of the Universe”, but such “history” did not exist. We believed that the “history of the Universe” had “13.82 billions years”, but the Universe did not exist and this “history” could not even be applied to all or some of the EDWs since one EW did not exist for any EDW. Therefore, the “age of the Universe” (“13.82 billion years”) did not exist, it has been just a “fiction” created by the human minds under the umbrella of the “age” of each “human being”. Exactly as the mind does not exist for the corresponding body[17] and each mind-EW does not exist for the macro-EW (where it is placed its corresponding body), the same is true for each EW in relationship with any EDW. There are no causal relationships between the EDWs (only correspondences), “time” does not exist, therefore, the “history of the Universe” (“13.82 years”) is quite a wrong notion.[18]

► Dark energy: A planet (the macro-EW) corresponds to a huge amalgam of microparticles (the micro-EW) which correspond to a huge number of electromagnetic waves (the field-EW). The electromagnetic field moves in all directions with the speed c. For us as indirect observers, all the electromagnetic waves (each corresponding to a particular microparticle) have the speed of light, c. Because of these correspondences, the speed of the microparticles are constantly increasing up: the speed c of the electromagnetic waves (the field-EW) “pushes”, indirectly through correspondence, the microparticles (the micro-EW) to increase, constantly, their speeds. The same argument is available for the increasing speed of any planet (the macro-EW) which corresponds to an amalgam of microparticles which corresponds to an electromagnetic field (which it is revealed with the speed c toward one direction), the direction of the moving planet. Also, each galaxy corresponds to an electromagnetic wave (which it is revealed with the speed c toward one direction). Therefore, for us as indirect observers, all the galaxies moves in all directions with the increasing speeds because the microparticles which correspond to each planet are pushed, indirectly, to increase their speeds by the corresponding electromagnetic waves (or parts of the  electromagnetic field which moves in all directions with the speed c). Having certain masses, the microparticles and the planets could not reach the speed c., but their speeds have been constantly increasing just because of their correspondence to the electromagnetic field (which it has always been revealed with the speed c in all directions). Anyway, because of these correspondences, all the microparticles have been accelerated their speeds, therefore the speed of any planet (which corresponds to a huge amalgam of microparticles) has been constantly accelerating. There is no need for the external forces, even if, in our work (2016), we indicated that the dark energy would correspond to certain forces of some phenomena which belong to an unknown EDW (maybe, to the meta-EW). The natural motion of the electromagnetic field/wave (its “moving” in all directions with speed c) corresponds to a phenomena which belong to an EDW, probably, the pre-Big-Bangs-EW. For us as indirect observers, the “expansion of galaxies/Universe” in all directions is the result of the correspondences between the electromagnetic field (which it it is revealed with speed c in all directions in the field-EW), the microparticles (the micro-EW) and the planets/galaxies (the macro-EW). 

► The “history of the Universe”: The mind-EW has its own ontology, it really exists, but not in the illusory “spacetime” (i.e., “nothing” in which we place the microparticles and the macroparticles, but “nothing” corresponds to the electromagnetic field). The mind-EW does not exist for the field-EW, the micro-EW or the macro-EW. For us as indirect observers, the electromagnetic field, the microparticles and the macroparticle have all the property of “extension” (Descartes’ slogan), but the mind has no extension (and no “time”) (it has the property of “thinking” – again, Descartes). Then where is the mind-EW placed? Nowhere in the relationship to the other EDWs (including the EW0), it just exists in itself, no more. Then where is the EW0 placed? Nowhere, exactly like the mind-EW. The electromagnetic field, the microparticles and the macroparticles are all placed “somewhere”, but aren’t these ED entities just “phenomena” inside the mind, and outside there is that Kantian “think-in-itself”? According to the EDWs perspective, for us as indirect observers, the ED entities mentioned in the previous sentence really exist in their EDWs. Then what it would be the relationship between the mind-EW and the EW0, for instance? There is no relationship between any two EDWs since one EW does not exist for any EDW. The ED entities exist in their corresponding EDWs, no more. Does the EW0 really exist? But the EW0 is the Hypernothing (i.e., nothing). Can we say that the EW0 has its own ontology? As we wrote in our previous works, the Hypernothing has its own hyperontology (i.e., it hypercorrespond to all other ED ontologies), while all the other EDWs have their own ontologies, but one ontology does not exist for any ED ontology. However, the microentities (the micro-EW) would not have existed without the existence of the electromagnetic field (the field-EW), but there are correspondences between these EDWs (not causalities). We realize that the microparticles and the macro-entities are all placed within the same illusory “spacetime framework” which corresponds to the electromagnetic field (there is that “chain-of-correspondences”), while the EW0 and the mind-EW are not placed in the same “framework”. If we accept the Big Bangs (13.82 billions “years” ago), we have to add the anti-field-EW which together with the field-EW represent “nothing”, i.e., the EW0. The revealing of the existence of the field-EW is not a real “revealing”, it is just a discovery of the Big Bangs and of the field-EW from our viewpoint (using our instruments) within that “chain-of-correspondences”. We have been able to discover the motion of the electromagnetic field (its movement with speed c but no “time”) because we have been part of this chain-of-correspondences (field-micro-macro-mind). The micro-entities and the macro-entities are not placed in “space” but in “nothing” which corresponds to the electromagnetic field.[19] Again, for us as indirect observers, this chain-of-correspondences have not existed either for the EW0 or the anti-field-EW (this EW has something against the “extension” and the speed of the electromagnetic field from the field-EW in order both these ED entities to represent nothing, i.e. the EW0 – if we accept before the “Big Bang” was nothing).

When we use certain instruments of observation and we see, in the past, certain events like the “cosmic microwave background radiation” we have to be aware that we “discover” what our apparatus permit us to “see”, i.e., some ED events in the “past” which belong to certain EDWs. For us, as indirect observers, the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation  is the “oldest electromagnetic radiation in the universe” filling all space” and it “is landmark evidence of the Big Bang origin of the universe”. (Wikipedia, 2021) We see the CMB radiation (part of the field-EW) using certain instruments of observation, but in the same place, there are ED events which belong to the EDWs. In fact, the “history of the universe” is created by us looking back (using certain instruments) in “time” at the light coming from that time toward us, but, in this way, we observe only certain past phenomena which belong to some, but not all, the EDWs. These observations could not reveal us the “entire history” of the “entire Universe”, i.e., of all the EDWs which existed in the past or have existed from the Big Bangs until today. Observing only the light in the field-EW from the past, we cannot consider that we observe the entire history of the “Universe”. The question “From where did appear everything?” is a question created within a wrong framework, therefore, the question is quite wrong: the answer, the statement accepted by the majority of physicists today, “everything appeared from nothing”, is a strong ontological contradictory statement created within the unicorn world.

► Mind and brain: The mind corresponds to the brain (a macro-entity), and this is the reason the mind (an EW) “perceives” as an observer, indirectly, the macro-objects. Without the brain, the mind would not exist. We, as indirect observers, are forced to accept the existence of the macro-entities just because the human mind corresponds to a macro-entity (the brain).[20] Without such correspondence, the mind would not exist. If we accepted the reductionism (the macro-objects do not exist), we would not be able to agree that the human mind corresponds to an amalgam of microparticles! We cannot reduce everything (including the brain) to the microparticles or the electromagnetic field. If we accepted this reductionism, we would accept the mind does not exist. However, only your mind can read these sentences, not your brain.[21] Also, we cannot reduce the mind to the brain. (We cannot explain a perceptual color image in the brain!) We have to accept the macro-objects, but these entities cannot be placed within the same world (place) with the microparticles; there would be a strong ontological contradiction to accept the existence of the macro-objects and the microparticles in the same place (“the unicorn world”) at the same time. The conclusion is unavoidable: because of the existence of the human minds (as the EDWs), for us (indirect observers), we have to accept the existence of the EDWs (these EDWs exist in themselves) and to reject completely the idea of the “history of the Universe”. We observe certain EDWs having structures which fit directly or indirectly with the structures of our mind, brain and our measurement apparatus. However, because of development of other measurements apparatus within the EDWs framework, in the future, we will be able to observe other EDWs.

References

Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu (2019), The Metaphysics of Epistemologically Different Worlds: “Hypothesis non fingo!”, (Table of categories, Hypernothing, and three “empty words”: nothing, infinity, God), Datagroup

Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu (2016), Dark matter and Dark Energy, Space and Time, and Other pseudo-notions in Cosmology, Datagroup-Int, S.R.L.

• Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu, Self as an Epistemological World, Datagroup-Int, S.R.L (published in Romanian in 2016)

(2016), Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu, Dark matter and dark energy, space and time, and other pseudo-notions in cosmology, Datagroup-Int, S.R.L

Gabriel Vacariu, (2015/2016), Illusions of Human Thinking: on concepts of Mind, Reality, and Universe in Psychology, Neuroscience and Physics, Springer Publishing Company

Gabriel Vacariu (2015), “GOD CANNOT EVEN EXIST!”, here: http://filosofie.unibuc.ro/wp-content/uploads/September-2015-Vacariu-God-even-cannot-exist.docx

(2010) Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu: “Mind, Life and Matter in the Hyperverse”, University of Bucharest Press

(2021) Cosmic microwave background, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background

[1] In our book from 2019, we indicated that for the origin of the EDWs, there are three possibilities: “God”, infinite regression, and nothing. At my webpage, there is a paper “God cannot even exist”, in which I eliminate the existence of any God. So, since “God” could not even exist, it could not be the origin of everything. Also, in our book, “Metaphysics” (2019), we eliminate the existence of God and also we prove that we have to avoid the regression ad infinitum, since the “infinite” (any kind of “infinite”) cannot even exist. Therefore, the only alternative which remains is “nothing”, but my “nothing” (the origin of everything) is a special kind of “nothing”, i.e., it is the Hypernothing (the EW0, the first EW).

[2] The idea of the “Universe”/world is a religious notion. Every religion sustained this notion: God(s), humans and all other entities were placed within the same Universe/world. The notion of the Universe/world has existed since the appearance of human beings until I indicated in my works (2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, etc.) this notion is quite wrong.

[3] This expression “everything from nothing” sustains a causality between “nothing” and “everything”. On the contrary, within the EDWs perspective, between the EDWs there is no causality since one EW does not exist for any EDW. Therefore, this expression “everything from nothing” is quite a wrong one!

[4] We can talk about a kind of “symmetry” between the EW1 and the EW-1. However, the EW-1 has not been discovered yet since nobody has thought about it until now…

[5] The EW1 and the EW-1 could represent the matter and the anti-matter for the Standard Model. However, within the EDWs perspective, between these types of matter is a totally different relationship than that considered by the Standard Model: there are “correspondences”, not “interactions”.

[6] See Vacariu and Vacariu (2016).

[7] We recall, within the same framework, the “uniformity of the Universe” after the Big Bangs. There is also the uniformity of the electromagnetic field in correspondence to the discrepancies which represented, later, the microparticles and much later, the planets…

[8] We could talk about the “Big Bangs” and the field-EW only from our viewpoint, as indirect observers; the Big Bangs and the field-EW did not exist for the EW0. We are the results of the chain-of-correspondences (see below), but we do not exist for the EW0.

[9] We can replace the field-EW with the EW1 and the EW-1.

[10] As we indicated in our previous works, the inflation period did not exist. We replace “inflation” with more Big Bangs in different places or now we replace it with “fast revealing” (but not “inflation” which surpassed the speed of light c) of the field-EW. (This “fast revealing” is strong relate to our explanation of the quantum entanglement. See our previous works) The process of revealing could be faster than the speed of light since it did not involve any physical motion: revealing is not motion of something physical, it is just revealing of something physical. At the beginning, this process of revealing was faster than later because of some phenomena that took place in the pre-Big-Bang-EW.

[11] The Hypernothing represents Parmenides’ “One”, the unmoved and the indivisible, but it is not a real “One”, it is “nothing” (the EW0). The field-EW, the micro-EW and the macro-EW both represent Heraclitus’s everything in motion (since the electromagnetic field has the speed c and the corresponding ED entities like the microparticles and the macroparticles, because of their mass, have less speed than c, but all these ED entities have always been not static in correspondences to the electromagnetic field.

[12] Einstein’s general relativity indicates the expanding of the ”Universe”, i.e.,  it refers to the entities (the galaxies/planets) from the macro-EW, but it does not explains the cause of this expansion. Anyway, the “Big Bang” could have not produced the accelerations of the galaxies after 13.82 billions years. We indicate the cause of this expansion here: after the Big Bangs, because the electromagnetic field has the same speed, c, for all different frameworks, we can consider this speed as an “absolute speed”. The electromagnetic field could represent the “absolute EW” in relationship to the micro-EW and the macro-EW. For us as observers, the field-EW appeared before the micro-EW and the macro-EW and all the microparticle and the macro-objects corresponded to the electromagnetic field. For us as indirect observers, the formation of the micro-EW and the macro-EW depended, indirectly through correspondence, to the existence of the field-EW. (The field-EW was revealed (not created from nothing) by the Big Bangs. This revelation created the possibility the electromagnetic waves to interact and because of these interactions, through correspondences, the microparticles appeared within the micro-EW.) Without the existence of the field-EW, the micro-EW and the macro-EW would have not appeared. The fundamental motion is the speed of light/electromagnetic field c and the motions of all other ED entities (all motions being less than c, because all these ED entities have masses, so physicists believe “time” exist for these entities) have corresponded to the speed of electromagnetic field, c. Because of this fact, we can take the electromagnetic field (with its speed c) as an “absolute framework”. For us, the field-EW is the first EW after the Big Bangs and, with its constant speed of light, c (no “time”), we can consider the field-EW as the “absolute EW”. If we accept there was nothing before the Big Bangs, together with this “absolute framework”, there was also the anti-field-EW (we would not talk about “antimatter”, but about “anti-energy” – the energy was first released by the Big Bangs) and both the EDWs corresponded to “nothing”, i.e., the EW0. (With the EDWs, we cannot talk about “symmetry”; we can talk about the “charge-parity-time” symmetry within the unicorn world, but it would be meaningless for the EDWs. The “Universe” would be “out of balance”/in an “asymmetry” just because it does not exist!) Also, it is meaningless to talk about the “symmetry” between “matter” and “antimatter” (in our framework, there is no “symmetry” between the EW1 and the EW-1 since on EW did not exist for any EDW). “Nothing” (the EW0) is a kind of “framework” before this “absolute EW” (represented by the field-EW). However, for us as indirect observers, the field-EW (with no “time”) does not exist for any EDW, there are only correspondences between the field-EW and the EDWs, but the correspondences do not have any ontological status. Each EW exists in itself, but in correspondences to the EDWs. We cannot talk about the “history of the Universe”. (see a footnote below)

[13] The speed of the electromagnetic field is c (the speed of light), therefore, “time” (from the EDWs perspective, “time” means just “internal interactions”) does not exist for this field. So, we cannot talk about the “history” of the field-EW.

[14] Since “spacetime” cannot have any ontology (see Vacariu and Vacariu 2016), we have to replace Witten’ superstring theory (11 dimensions) with the EDWs… (For the EDWs perspective against the (super)string theory, see Vacariu and Vacariu 2010)

[15] Since the anti-field-EW is an EW which does not exist for any EDW, we have not founded the “anti-matter” yet. Moreover, the human being is the last element in the “chain-of-correspondences” (field-micro-macro-mind) and this is the reason we have not been able to “discover” yet the anti-field-EW.

[16] For us as indirect observers, the “causalities” exists only among the entities of each EW; among the ED entities, there are only correspondences. Therefore, there is not a “history” of the “Universe”, but for us as observers, there are “histories” of some EDWs. (The field-EW has no “time”, so it has no “history”.) The history of the macro-EW (and the causalities among its entities) did not exist for either the field-EW or the EW0. For us as indirect observers, there is the “chain of correspondences”, but it does not involve a real “causality between”/“history of” the EDWs. The “age” (“history”) of a human body does not exist for the field-EW/EW0. Nevertheless, the self/human being/mind has no “history”; it just acquires knowledge, but this is not “history” and, in its essence, the self does not change/it remains the same during its entire life. The self/mind corresponds to the body and (the macro-EW) and to the electromagnetic field (no “time”): the body has “time” (i.e., there are certain processes with quite small speed) and it “dies”, while the mind has no “time”/“space”: there are no processes “inside” the mind (there is no “inside” or “outside” the mind), but the mind/life corresponds to certain bodily processes (with “spacetime”) and to the electromagnetic field (no “time”). (About the self, see Vacariu and Vacariu 2017) At the first side (for us as indirect observers), the notion of “local histories” for the EDWs could have a meaning, but only apparently (these local histories have meaning only for us as observers). We can talk about your “birthday”, but your mind/life existed long time before this day. We cannot identify exactly when your life/mind (through the combination of two bodies which corresponded to two self-EDWs) appeared. Your life is in correspondence to other lives/material things (bodies). Working within the unicorn world, the human mind has included itself within the “history of the Universe” (each mind being a part of a “history” of continuous interactions/causalities among all “its” entities) since the “Big Bang” until now, but this “history” and these “interactions”/“causalities” are all wrong, fictive notions (created by the human mind). The “Big Bang” did not exist for the actual “Universe” (anyway, it did not exist for your mind), therefore, it is meaningless to check for the “Big Bang of the Universe”, in general. All the EDWs have always corresponded to the EW0 (i.e., nothing and therefore, it is meaningless to talk about the “beginning” of nothing).

[17] The “age of a human being” is the age of the body, the mind or both? The cells of a human body change several times during a life of 70 years. Can we say that it is not the same “body” in this period?

[18] For the field-EW (the first EW after the Big Bangs) (and the mind-EW), even the physical notion of “time” does not exist (because the electromagnetic field has the speed c). The “passing time” has been imposed to the human minds by the “passing days and nights” (in reality, the rotation of the Earth around its axis), by the “passing year” (in reality, the rotation of the Earth around the Sun) and by the “passing time” for any organism during “years” (in reality, there are certain processes of the organism- which it is not even the same during “its” entire life!). Together with the fact that the mind-EW preserves its identity during the entire life (it is about correspondence not causality or identity), even if the organism is changing during the same period, the mind has the illusions of passing “time” for the brain/mind/organism/“Universe”. The correspondence between the mind and the brain/body created the illusions of space and time (the extension of the brain created the illusion of “space” and the processes of the brain created the illusion of “time” for the mind) and because the brain/body is a macro-entity, the mind perceives the macro-entities! Instead of the “Universe”, there are these EDWs, one EW does not exist for any EDW, so how could we talk about the “age of the Universe”? The “passing time” (time does not exist) and the “age of the Universe” are artificial notions created by the human mind within the unicorn world.

[19] There are different types of sets of the micro- and the macro-entities with different types of processes (these sets involves different types of illusory “times”), therefore, we cannot judge the same “time” (i.e., the same type of processes) for all these different types of sets. For all the ED entities of the “Universe”, there are different types of “time” (i.e., different types of processes). So, there are not only different illusory “spaces”, but also different illusory “times” for many different types of entities (recall Einstein’ special theory of relativity in which “spacetime” becomes “relative”, but for us the relativization of “spacetime” rejects any ontology of the “spacetime”), i.e., there are the EDWs and not the “Universe” (with only one “spacetime”). (See Einstein’s both relativities without “spacetime” in Vacariu and Vacariu 2016) During the “history of the world” (wrong notion, of course), the human beings have judged there is only “one Universe” (with one “spacetime framework”) because each mind is an EW which has the same identity during its entire “life”. (For this topic, see Vacariu and Vacariu 2017) In reality, there are so many “histories” for so many ED entities/processes that it would be meaningless to talk about the “history of the Universe”. I would ask the reader to indicate me a history of this kind: the formations of planets, for instance. The formations of planets involve EDWs, and moreover, there are EDWs according to the special relativity… Can we talk about the history regarding the formation of one planet? Again, there are EDWs involves in this process, so which one would represent the “formation of that planet”? We can talk about the “history of the Earth” (4 billion years), don’t we? Again, for us as indirect observers, there are EDWs (with certain correspondences between the ED phenomena), the existence of the Earth being just an one entity in the macro-EW which corresponds to many ED entities (from the EDWs). The “history of the Earth” is just an event within a particular EW, but if we judge better (within the EDWs perspective), we cannot even identify this particular “event” in the macro-EW… We cannot identify exactly the “identity” of the Earth during these 4 billions years: could we talk about the Earth as being an entity during these four billion years? In other words, could we talk about the Earth as being an entity with particular identity in this period? I don’t believe, we cannot… Then, how could we talk about the history of the “Universe”? (Each human body does not have the same identity during its entire “life”…) Nevertheless, the Earth existed as an entity in the macro-EW due to its indirect interactions with other planets (like the Sun), but its “identity” is given by these indirect (corresponding) interactions (like “gravity”?), not by our perceptions. Anyway, we have to accept the mind/self really exist, therefore, the Earth as a planet has its ontology in the macro-EW (due to its indirectly interactions with other planets).

[20] In order to solve the innate-acquired problem, we indicate that, at birth, the brain/body is innate, the human mind is “tabula rasa” or “blank slate” (Locke).

[21] The mental image of this page does not exist in your brain but only in your mind. Therefore, we cannot reduce the mind to the brain. Each mind is an EW (the mind-EW), the brain belongs to the macro-EW, so the solution to the eternal mind-brain problem is: there are EDWs.