You are on page 1of 2

The Theory of Everything

(Why there’s something rather than nothing.) The Problem: According to the ‘paradox of causality’ nothing can exist, yet here we are. That is, if every effect, such as a broken glass, had a cause, such as an earthquake, then even if we trace our history back over an infinite number of causal interactions an infinite more would still precede them, so no matter how many causal interactions took place modern day events would never come to be, yet here we are. The most obvious solution is to simply assume that the law of causality was broken, in which case a finite number of causal interactions took place between the initial cause and current events. However, since a truly causeless event has no explanation this is a scientific and philosophical dead end. The Solution (Part 1 of 2): From a perspective outside reality looking in nothing has, does or will ever exist, consequently, the law of causality was never broken because it was never put to the test. The Solution (Part 2 of 2): Ironically, if absolutely nothing exists then there’s nothing to cause one equally valid expression of nothingness, mathematical or otherwise, to be favored over another; consequently, they must all exist. This can be visualized on a piece of paper by surrounding a 0 with relevant mathematical equations, then covering up everything but the resultant.

In reality, imaginary numbers, multiple dimensions and the like allow for extremely complex expressions of nothingness, the most important consequence of which is that they cannot all be expressed simultaneously while still equating to zero, so they must share reality by equally & instantly negating each other’s changes, otherwise their non-zero resultant (something rather than nothing) would re-create the paradox of causality. For example, the non-zero sub-equation (3 + -7 = -4) can result in zero only when combined with a negating sub-equation (9 + -5 = 4), but since this excludes other sub-equations they must share reality by equally & instantly negating each other’s changes [ex. (3 + -7) + (9 + -5) becomes (4 + -7) + (8 + -5)].

In conclusion, the paradox of causality can only be avoided if ABSOLUTELY nothing exists; however, this means there’s nothing to cause one equally valid expression of nothingness to be favored over another, and since they can’t all be expressed simultaneously (while still equating to zero) they must share reality by instantly and equally negating each other’s changes. This ‘Theory of Nothingness’, which ironically is a theory of everything, makes testable predictions that can be disproved. That is, all changes within our universe, including any interacting universes, MUST be instantly negated, and when combined, MUST equate to zero (otherwise the paradox of causality would be re-created). The laws of physics overwhelmingly support this theory, which is amazing considering that we can imagine an infinite number of laws which blatantly contradict it, such as any law without symmetry. For example, the decay of a particle is instantly and equally negated by the creation of new particles and/or energies and the recently discovered Dark Energy not only brought the total energy content of our universe to zero, it had increased at precisely the rate necessary to ensure that the total energy content of our universe was always zero.

- Written by Paul Foster ( -