| Home. | Universe Galaxies And Stars Archives. | 
Universe Galaxies Stars logo.
     | Universe | Big Bang | Galaxies | Stars | Solar System | Planets | Hubble Telescope | NASA | Search Engine |

Nothingness universe made of carbon.

Ten Years Since The Revolution at Amazon.

SAS Black Ops at Amazon.
Amazon Kindle EBook Reader: Click For More Information.

nothingness predicted in the bible.

For thousands of years this subject matter has been the cause of some of the greatest conjecture known to man: A nothingness is explicitly predicted in the bible, and explains how God arrived in our known universe. It is the very platform of religion - and modern theology. To any theologian, a defined nothingness would-be the single most important factor in vindicating current religious belief.

Until now, as we have previously discussed, a Big Bang singularity has taken precedence over everything else.

Ever since bell laboratories detected an initial background noise, a nothingness belief has been relegated from the scene. Like some no longer wanted dog it has been cast out on to the streets, and left to fend for itself, abandoned and unwanted, by everyone that is, except those of a more religious persuasion.

And so to the significance of discovering this strange, yet seemingly illusive substance called simply, a nothingness singularity.

The implications for the church would be profound, as this discovery becomes a catalyst for religion, and the most important single biblical event since the birth, and life of Christ.

If I am right with my alternative philosophy, then science will need to reassess their entire understanding of universal theories. By that I mean religion, on a scale unknown before will have to be afforded much more credibility and serious thought, even by those that may disagree with this initial belief.

If I do manage to discover God's route into our universe, from this illusive nothingness, it will pose some very interesting questions. And fundamental amongst them: How did they predict in the 3rd century what we might discover today? With no prior insight to modern scientific technology to prove the theory, and no help from existing theories, what allowed for such a prophetic definition?

I won't claim for one moment this allows us the luxury of discovering God himself, but what I will say is it can show a mechanism to allow the said event, God to arrive in the universe.

What we will do, is attempt to lift that smoke screen from our minds and view existence with a more profitable benefit for us all. We might, at that time be able to stabilize a modern Christian theology within a secular scientific framework and bind the two cohesively together in a more realistic comprehension. To facilitate one's insight in to the others belief, and of course vice-versa.

But with an ever gaping chasm of indifference, that seems to lurk treacherously between the two, science and the church, it might be difficult. But not totally impossible! Some might even say the pair of them need their heads banged together, when they act so indifferently to each other like overgrown schoolboys in the playground, constantly sticking their tongues out at one another.

What we seek to achieve though, is not to take sides, or ally ourselves with any particular cause, or association. We want more to show we don't always have to be at odds with ourselves.

Sometimes there is room for manoeuvre, provided we are prepared to be tolerant of each others' own personal belief.

What I wish to present with a nothingness doctrine, is an ability to show that science and religion can find common ground. I hope to explain how we can find God a special place in our universe, and perhaps, in later chapters show how God can have a remit to govern. And at the same time, convey to science a mechanism which allows the universe a scientific basis for formulation, construction, decay and of course, completion without relying on a Big Crunch singularity: A singularity at the end of the universe.

But to do that, we must first investigate some of the criteria that has prevented us from pursuing this philosophy in the first place. We must understand that certain events can confuse us, usually events of our own making. And in saying that, I would first like you to comprehend, the universe itself is not an individual person. To term that more simply: It doesn't always obey the same laws as we do.

And if that's the case, we might just understand that maybe mankind has bound his own definition of the universe, in his own insatiable desire to know its intimate secrets.

We have to assume, that although us and the universe itself are two opposites sides of the same coin, whose value might be conclude as one, the description purveys totally different terminology. In other words mankind might have bound his own perception of the universe in his own lexicon red tape.

To delve more deeply amongst this belief, we have to assume a nothingness can never be exclusively nothing. It must always be something. Therefore when we pursue with a strong application, a sought after evaluation of a nothingness we must assume this a substance, and it would be a substance with illusive potential. And by that, I mean it has the ability to deceive. That might sound obtuse, that our universe can deceive us, but what it actually means is, not our universe particularly deceives or misleads us, but we, unintentionally do it ourselves.

Our own aesthetic approach misses an obvious detail.

If we take the dictionary definition of that word, nothingness, we see it refers to it as being non-existent. And we naturally assume from that abbreviated term, that there must not be anything there. It becomes palpable at that precise moment, a nothingness, non-existent, therefore it does not exist.

But if we view the nothingness from a universal term, we emerge with a different interpretation. We see conclusively the entire universe applies inextricably to the laws of physics: That branch of science that deals with the mechanics, dynamics, light, heat, sound, electricity, and magnetism of natural events.

But, if we could exclude these universal characteristics from the equation, we could show that a universe that does not apply to these mechanics cannot exist, even though it is still there. The laws of physics lay dormant ready and waiting to be awoken!

But to do so, we must first search for a substance that would satisfy the basic needs of the laws of physics. And that substance must show how the elementary laws of physics do not apply, but must also show they can apply with a little processing, and yet simultaneous must reflect convincingly everything we envisage around us today. And that alone suggests we seek a carbonous compound, as everything here is carbon based: You; me; everything!

However, in doing so, we also wish to include, not just the compound based elements that describe the universe, its Galaxies in formation, the productivity of its stars, and the multitude of various Planets that no doubt fill it: But we also need to sequestrate time, to leave only God's time. God's time basically means no time, for God must be equally able to look forwards as God can looks backwards whilst governing the present, and the only way to achieve this, is to make everywhere today.

This confiscation of time is merely temporary, as time does need to be reintroduced as individual packages later on. We must emphasize that distinction between us as bodies of mass moving through the universe, and the universe itself which retains an ubiquity in all places simultaneous.

By that, I mean we will run parallel time frames within our universe. And by doing so, we can show, while we, or any other piece of mass, a body measured by its resistance to acceleration does, as special relativity suggests, have individual packages of time, the permeation of our noble universe does not.

For simplification we might say, although individual elements moving within a universal field have individual time frames, a surrounding electromagnetic field may not have time frames. Therefore, from a nothingness, time can be composed under a premiss of composure. And from this, we might allow an ability for the universe to decompose.

So what is a nothingness, that substance predicted be 3rd century theologians made of?

Quite simply it is a diamond vitrescent nutation, or what you might understand as an ordinary diamond here on earth: Although on universal terms it will contain subtle differences. These differences will apply to a more rigorous scrutiny. But as these aspects of carbon, including C60 might be vastly too complex to discuss, we will use, for an easy recognition, a basic substance everyone can comprehend, or our debate becomes too intricate.

If we imagine an entire universe constructed as a solid block of diamond, we might be forgiven for placing forwards this theory. On first assumption it seems crazy to postulate universal theory based around an elementary substance so obvious. But when we delve more deeply in to its workings, we find some strange and illusive powers.

As I previously mentioned, everything in the universe is carbon based, and diamond in its purist form, is absolute carbon. This means, not only could we create everything in existence today from a solid block of diamond, but we could also show how, diamond allows us to quickly evaluate a true potential for universal dimensions. But to do that we must discuss a principle where we perceive not a singular universe, but universes plural. Or what we might term multi-universal production.

This is based on a theory that if our universe was to be established, we must identify that early criteria we said was absent with a Big Bang singularity: cause and effect. By actually allowing ourselves to work from a solid block of diamond we might be able to imagine a specific section inside, that simply capitulates to surrounding pressure. The way this unfurls is based on one universe becoming a catalyst for the next.

We must understand, that as a single universe fuses, it will produce, with this theory, a system known as fusion/infusion: To liquify by heat energy and syphon from it mass.

To give you a clearer idea of how this happens, just imagine as a production of energy racing away from a strategical central point, like ripples on a millpond, while mass and matter will move automatically in the opposite direction: It will consolidate, a touch like water going down the plughole.

This means, for the layman, we have managed to perfect an entity that can literally enable one universe to be born from the next. As a universe opens, its fusion principle will be so infinitely hot, heat will cause the diamond structure to expand, that will place intolerable pressure at another section within its fabric and produce a fracture line. As the first said universe gradually begins to cool, the fracture line in a second position will slowly subdivide. When its matrix witnesses this phenomenon, it has no option but to fuse.

As fusion happens, infusion is born. All universal mass is systematically syphoned to the central core. And it must be central for a dimensional universe, as that location naturally becomes the densest and most primordial point.

The more mass that directs itself towards that position, the heavier it becomes.

For an easy recognition, you might like to think of it a touch like a magician cramming hankies in his pocket before going out on stage, and then amazing the audience by pulling streams of them out later. But as our newly forming universe has no hands, it just rely's on the self movement of weight to locate individual neutrons: Uncharged particles that make up roughly half the particles of the nucleus of an atom. And by the time all this material is deposited to that precise region, nothing but an electromagnetic field is left to permeate the surrounding region.

We might like to call this an ether, even though science stipulates the proposal of such a substance, since early experiments into the velocity of light have concluded it does not exist. They term it simply a vacuum.

But because later on we'll be proposing a hypothesis to re-evaluate those experiments, we will term it an electromagnetic ether. However, because all those particles which remain should theoretically contain zero mass, the principle recognition of a vacuum application still applies: It can produce exactly the same phenomenon as a vacuum.

By endorsing a system, where one universe actually brings about the construction of another, with its heat expansion and then cooling contraction, we have now shown, that not only are we capable of providing cause and effect, but can show a universe has finite boundaries and a central cortex.

But is this central cortex that important?

It is more than important, it is absolutely crucial. The centrally located contains all our newly formed universal mass, and is basically the key to time, which we will discuss further in a later chapter entitled Time.

However, for the moment I wish to concentrate on another significant roll the central point plays; that of universal gravity.

As every piece of material, during its subdivision located to this point, its density must have become so enormous that the average human mind could not even begin to contemplate its atomic value or weight. Yet this place will become our universes very powerhouse, the engine that drives the machine. And in creating it, we never attempted to manipulate the necessity of this remarkable feat: We merely stepped back and watched as the natural laws of gravity produced the very effect necessary to engineer its own birth. Creation was born at that precise moment, and I might add, an ability for God to arrive in to the universe.

From a diamond nothingness, that contains no electrons, which cannot be measured, simply provided by its own ability, with a little help from its neighbour, its creation. During that production time, which we might term, a silent scream, every microscopic piece of material in the universe moved to a point directly central to the peripheral walls.

At this stage, a perfect ubiquity would have been created and a process to generate the universe as we observe it today. But what we must also remember, is as a hot, early, fusion/infusion division took place, energy, that contemporary of mass would have moved logically in the opposite direction.

And that means its temperature must have increased with its separation. If that is what actually did happened, then a reason for a hot early universe becomes much more probable with a fusion/infusion principle, rather than a Big Bang singularity.

The new concept, which we termed colloquially a, silent scream, would insist all energy at that point, because of its extreme temperature convert to radioactive background material. However, it must be understood that with a central denomination of all universal mass, which produces a strong seat of gravity, all waves must emit from a precise point. But besides that, not only will waves emit from that location, but all elementary waves carrying their contributory components must originally assemble there too.

This might allow us to speculate that what science is hearing from its equipment, is not the last remaining echoes of a Big Bang singularity, but a more solid reverberation of sound from all universal events. We might like to consider it as the most intense black hole. A black hole so powerful, everything in the universe has already been swallowed, but once everything enters the said universal black hole, the uuniverse itself stops turning, gravity is lost, and so all material is slowly released to return whence it came.

And so, how do we get these waves?

If we imagine, under our new induction for universal theory we created a mechanism to produce a centre for all universal mass to consolidate, we must also assume residual energy is left to permeate the dimensional universe itself, is no longer arbitrary. In fact we have created a perfectly balanced structure where one element perfectly reflects the other. This is achieved by motion. With a central weight of heavy Neutron mass turning, a secondary alternative production of energy must keep a relative parity: We term this balanced forces: A system to ensure there is an equal distribution of both contributory bodies when in motion, and retain the weight equally for that duration.

For a more obvious example, you might like to imagine a set of scales. If we place a bag of sugar of equal weight on either end, we could strike a respective parity, and say at that moment they balance: If however we increased the density one end and placed a second bag on our scales, no doubt the balance would be upset and a disparity emerge.

If we then assume we had no more bags, and absolutely no way of distributing the weight equally by splitting the bags, how might we once again achieve a reflective weight equality? To return to a structured parity we would set our scales in motion: We spin them.

As we employ this technique our scales gather momentum and distribution is forced equally along the bar of the scales when a correct velocity is reached. At that moment we might term the event as, balanced forces. Therefore we have to view the universe, for this period, like a set of universal scales in motion that must always retain an parity.

If all universal matter shifted to a central location - surrounding energy itself would contain relatively little, if no atomic weight. But as the central position of the universe is infinitely dense, the chances of a universe gathering motion are negligible. Yet a strange event would then occur.

Once all universal matter has consolidated, and the last productive particle located to the point of the universe, matter would no longer be construed as mass: A body measured by its resistance to acceleration, simply because it would no longer be in motion: Thus it would be weightless. Once this event has finalised, as all matter centralised and left only residual energy, we would obtain a universe of infinite weightlessness. From then on, matter would start to dissipate. From a central cortex it would drift back to whence it came from. And suddenly, a chain reaction will commence: Super heavy Neutrons will espouse with protons, positively charged particles accounting for roughly half the nucleus of an atom.

These would supernova into tiny, baby galaxies, probably of acute density once they instinctively distance themselves from that central point.

But as they increase their volume of mass, once in motion, our central core will also, once again try to employ balanced forces to counter-act the initial action. This would operate like a tug-of-war, where one side constantly pulls the other side, and vice-versa.

And so, what we get is new universal mass in an ether struggling to pull more matter away from the structural central core, that insists on collapsing back each time under its own productive weight.

And it's this constant to-and-froing that will create a pump action. It would simply work like a valve application; as it constantly opens and closes. And the constant motion each time will produce a wave movement that will inevitably produce, over a long period of time what we might like to call, a universal heart; and if we were to apply specific criteria at this juncture to lock in a prediction, we would say we need to find a pulse out there somewhere, with a steady, consistent beat. But whether this beat will be slow, fast, rapid or over a period of time - one beat per hundred years, or tens or thousands of years is anyone's guess. It might produce a very rapid beat every few seconds, or a methodical beat just once in a life time. And that could prove difficult for us to locate it.

But personally, I think it would be a rapid beat, because of an accumulatory effect. The signal increases over time.

And so, why is a nothingness theory better then?

Most of the reasons why I applied a nothingness to open our universe, became obvious the moment we viewed them. Principle amongst them was an ability to create cause and effect, which we suggested to be so important in universal production.

This from a scientific point, allowed us to introduce reasons why a universe might come in to being, rather than dealing in ambiguous rhetoric. We showed how a diamond substance with zero electron value does not apply to the laws of physics, therefore, technically it does not exist, even though it is still there.

We showed how one universe can produce the desired effect, by heat expansion, to create another universe. As it opened, heat caused expansion. It cools which allows contraction. At that definitive moment, from another region of nothingness, a new universe is born. We gave it a dimensional framework, that of the two weakest points of its distance. And this allowed all universal mass to centralise.

That centralization creates time. However long it took to centrally compose, will be how long it naturally takes to decompose.

This also permits us to have, and we will discuss this in more detail later, an Einsteinian seat of general relativity, big gravity that controls big events like the whole universe.

But by displaying an ability to allow this consolidation period to decay as discrete quanta, we provided ourselves with a possibility to allow Planck's quantum theory to be endorsed: Small gravity controlling motion in small amounts. We call this action from a reaction, quantum gravity: All big gravity controlled from a strategical central point, but allowed to decay as discrete quanta.

We also showed how a wave motion can be introduced to permit all elementary waves that permeate the universe, to become recognisable.

But most important of all, the nothingness itself signalled, for those of a religious persuasion, God's arrival. Our bible, through thousands of years of teaching has predicted this event happening. And although we are not saying it conclusively happened this way, we are showing how it is possible to allow it.

At that point, we need to understand that this theoretical evaluation also permits a stead-state theory to continue: The universe doesn't particularly expand but matter within does. It remains constant over time. In other words, that central bank of heavy Neutrons distributes its particles with a steady application, rather than one almighty, Big Bang!

    1.     2.     3.     4.     5.     6.     7.     8.     9.     10.     11.     12.     13.     14.     15.     16.     17.     18.     19.     20.     21.     22.     23.     24.     25.     26.     27.     28.     29.     30.     31.     32.     33.     34.     35.     36.     37.     38.     39.     40.     41.     42.     43.     44.     45.     46.     47.     48.     49.     50.     51.     52.     53.     54.     55.     56.     57.     58.     59.     60.     61.     62.     63.     64.     65.     66.     67.     68.     69.     70.     71.     72.     73.     74.     75.     76.     77.     78.     79.     80.     81.     82.     83.     84.     85.     86.     87.     88.     89.     90.     91.     92.     93.     94.     95.     First Page.

Below is a list of chapters for the Metaphysics Anthology. The book itself is designed as abit of fun! One man thinking out loud. You should not see it as science, merely enjoy the imagination of the human mind in full swing.

  Go To Print Article  

Universe - Galaxies and Stars: Links and Contacts

the web this site
 | GNU License | Contact | Copyright | WebMaster | Terms | Disclaimer | Top Of Page. |