The Universe Creating Itself From Nothing

Let's Begin With Nothing, No Time, No Space

Imagining absolutely nothing is apparently not an easy thing for most people to do, but for this exercise, it’s something I’d like you to try.

Before anything ever existed, there was nothing. Nothing at all. No light, no time, nothing to compare size to, no up or down.



If you could magically enter the nothing, a universe could pop into existence and then disappear in what seemed like an instant or it could last an eternity. From your observation within the nothing, you would not be able to tell.

For the rest of this story I’ll call this impossible magical position the “outside observer” which we’ll come back to later. Now that we have set the stage how do we bring our universe into existence?

The Great Question

How did the existence of our universe originate?

The current leading scientific belief is that our universe began with a “Big Bang”. (What Is the Big Bang Theory?) Although there are other theories, in this story I’m going to work with the Big Bang theory and try to explain how it may be possible that the universe could have been created from nothing.



Many years ago, I watched a show on TV where “renowned physicists” put forward their thoughts and theories about how the theorised “Big Bang” could have occurred. Unfortunately, I do not recall the name of the show or any names of those who were in it.

To my disappointment, not a single one of the supposedly renowned physicists was able to explain our universe’s creation from a point of absolute nothing. Each of the theories put forward relied on a pre-existing state or multiverses. In my mind not a single one of them was able to explain the origin of existence which was the actual question they were attempting to answer.

Religions generally claim that a God who has always existed and always will simply said a magic word and everything popped into existence. That leaves many to believe that a god entity exists and the universe is a separate thing, a possession of the god and subject to the god’s terms. That idea in it’s most basic understanding also leans towards something (the god) existing prior to the universe.

I would like to explore the possibility that our universe came into being on it’s own where nothing existed at all prior to its existence. By doing so, I believe we can marry both science and religious ideas in a way that they can be in harmony with each other in regards to creation.

Atheists, please bare with me. What if the concept of god can be explained in scientific terms, wouldn’t that be acceptable?
Religious people, please do not conclude that I’m being blasphemes with my following descriptions of god, if what I’m thinking is close to being correct I’ll only be showing how god managed to create itself.

Alpha To Omega

Regardless if you have religious beliefs of not, for this story I’d like you to at least imagine that a god does exists and has full knowledge of everything that has been and everything that will become.

Just as the idea of nothing is hard to imagine for most people so is the concept of a god being omnipresent. A god being both in a state from Alpha (the beginning) to Omega (the end of everything) all at the same time. Meaning that right from the first moment of existence, this god is aware of everything that has and will happen until the very end of time.
(I Am Alpha and Omega)

I imagine that a third element is required to make sense of the Alpha state and the Omega state and convert them both into omnipresent knowledge and I’ll simply call that “God Consciousness”, god’s consciousness in the presence at any moment.

God consciousness is the act of deciphering knowledge as it grows forward in time from the Alpha state combined with all the Omega state knowledge travelling backwards in time. At every moment in time this consciousness is in touch with both past, present and future.

Put Yourself In God’s Shoes



What if you could experience every moment of your own life from your birth (Your own Alpha) to your death (your Omega) all at once with the same type of consciousness. You’d know your entire story from your birth right up to your death.

If you decide that you don’t like the way your story ends or an event somewhere in the middle you might think you could chose to make a change to it. Unfortunately any change you think you could make will effect your future from that point and your entire story would change.

What you think you have changed would have never been the case in the first place. Your Omega state would be constantly informing your presence consciousness of how your life turns out.

Senario A: Living Longer
Your life is to be ended at age 20 from some sort of accident. Your Omega sends that message back to your Alpha and your consciousness at some point decides to avoid the accident. By avoiding the accident you manage to live to the age of 100 years. Your Omega sends that message back that you never experienced or died in the accident so you would never actually have to make a conscious decision to avoid an accident.

Senario B: Dying Early
Your Omega informs you that you live to the age of 100 years. For whatever reason you decide to end it early and jump off a cliff at age 20. Obviously your Omega will never make it to 100 and from your death at age 20, your Omega informs your past that you die at age 20 from a fall from a cliff.
These two scenarios will be played out again a little later in a slightly different way by the god in this story.

Would this mean you have no free will? Not exactly. If your presence conscious is deciphering both your Alpha and Omega at every moment, it would be in charge of creating your future and the Omega is essentially “reporting” back the final outcome. It would not be able to change something in the past, but using knowledge from the Omega state, decisions could be made in the moment for your future. Your live decisions.

This is what is meant when it is said that God gives us free will but already knows our choices. It doesn’t mean that our destiny is set in stone, but any choice we will make is known by Omega and therefore God’s presence consciousness.

To be continued...

Continuation...

The Magic of Omega


I stated earlier that Omega’s knowledge travels backward in time from the end of all to the beginning of existence. From the religious point of view that would be obvious if one believes in God being Alpha to Omega, but I did also make the claim that we could possibly use science to explain the creation of existence in a way that is in harmony with that too.

At this point I want to make it clear that I do not have a science background. I consider myself primarily as a musician, a creative type who likes to imagine strange and often impossible things for personal entertainment. For example in 2010 I put forward a theory I called “The Hammar Axis” (Discussed in January 2011 at AboveTopSecret: Solar System Orbiting the Hammar Axis) from imagining rotational motions in our Milky Way galaxy.

What I’m about to explain is another idea that I’ve been trying to put into words for over a decade. I’ll be using terms that I have made up to try to do so and I’m aware that I could do with some help of real scientist to name things properly.

Positrines, Negatrines And GCs

That’s what I called them, but I’m open to suggestions for better names. So what are they? I propose they are the smallest elements/forces that make up existence. They are found in everything throughout the universe and nothing would exist without them.

Positrines travel from the past into the future gathering information or possibly collectively sharing information simultaneously across the universe.

Negatrines carry information from the future, the very end of time as they travel into the past, backwards in time.

GCs (a reference to God Consciousness) decode the data found in both the positrines and negatrines creating whatever particles are required for matter to be materialised. They are possibly related to the Higgs boson (The Higgs boson), the manifestation of a field that gives mass to elementary particles and maybe they are the same thing?

Positrine ===> (GC right now) <=== Negatrine

Alpha <============================> Omega

“Cogito, ergo sum” I Think Therefore I am.

Very few people can claim to remember the moment of their birth, but a few people have made that claim at this website.
(I remember being born do you? & I remember life before I was born)

The act of remembering a birth is not the same as finding ones own identity. People who have made the claim to remember their birth and even a time before they were born have not claimed to know the full story of their life up to their death. Our identities develop as we grow, gaining knowledge of the world and of ourselves.

Let’s now revisit god experiencing the universe and having the omnipotence to make changes anywhere between Alpha to Omega as in life scenarios A and B above.

Somewhere, anywhere in between Alpha to Omega is where god actually creates itself. This is where the stage is set for the life of the universe and everything that will be in it adding to the knowledge in Omega that is to inform god all the way back to Alpha.

“OK” you may say, “But how does this cause creation to appear from nothing?”.

My answer is somewhat a tricky one. My thoughts are that creation actually occurs somewhere in between Alpha (The Big Bang so to speak) and Omega (the end of everything).

I know I promised to explain how the Big Bang occurred from the nothing and I will as we reach the conclusion.

Conclusion: All From Nothing

First, we have to revisit the impossible magical position of the “outside observer” sitting in the nothingness prior to anything existing at all. With nothing in all directions, we wouldn’t expect anything to happen, but to our surprise something does appear.

What appears is the first sign of Omega, a single negatrine is all that is necessary. A single negatrine that has been travelling back through time from Omega, the end of time all the way back to the Big Bang and continuing back just slightly earlier. Just earlier enough to make an appearance in the nothing.

The sheer act of this negatrine appearing in the nothing dictates that a positrine must also come into existence and in an instant Alpha is created. From that tiny action we have the true creation of the universe as Alpha to Omega begin decoding positrines and negatrines in the dance of existence.

That my friends is the simplest way I can explain what I think may be how nothing is required for a universe to be created.

I do believe it is magic.



Thank you for reading.

a reply to: Hammaraxx

I love this thought experiment, however NOTHING means Nothing. The idea of "going into the nothing" 'makes no sense. This is a major problem with the idea that the Universe came from "nothing" that's simply not possible. Nothing CAN NOT exist because it's nothing. The MINUTE you start talking about "nothing existing" you are instantly making it "something"

If you're saying there was a void fine, that's still something.

NOTHING is NOTHING, you can't go into nothing, you can't create nothing, you can't expand into nothing, you cant imagine nothing, you can't even describe nothing, because the minute you try to , you instantly make it something.

Conclusion? There was ALWAYS something, there will never be and CAN never be "Nothing."

a reply to: PsychoEmperor
Thank you for your reply.
You are very correct, you cannot go into nothing.

I know it's hard to imagine the "void", the "nothing", whatever word you chose to use to describe a state of absolutely no thing existing.

That is why I wrote "impossible magical position of the “outside observer” sitting in the nothingness prior to anything existing at all".

a reply to: Hammaraxx

Searching for understanding is a search for the self, we are tiny but we are a part of a greater whole.

The universe is that whole.

For the purpose of argument I am going to stay on the religious side.

Moshe asked the voice that spoke to him at the burning bush whom are you and that voice replied "I AM THAT I AM".

I am, the identity of self awareness, god made us in his image but was that speaking literally or metaphorically for we are AWARE being's that are self aware and are struggling to understand other's and the greater self of which we are a part.

But if you are looking at scientific reasoning, well here is my idea of the universe.

The Big Bang was not so much a big bang it was an inversion event of time and space caused at the very center of a collapsing star as it turned into a black hole, at that exact center (if there is such a thing given quantum uncertainty) gravity was pulling inward all around it AND outward toward that gravity - mass of the collapsing star in all direction's, this point became smaller than an atom and more intense even than the gravity outside it and was surrounded by an event horizon just like the one OUTSIDE the black hole, it warped and ripped the second space material of which our universe is made as the third space material of gravity pulled on the first space material that lies on the other side of our super string (second space) material of which everything even empty space in our time space continuum is made up of and tore second space creating a WHITE HOLE from which TIME and energy spewed into this tiny space, a tiny space that was now become a new pocket universe, a separate time space continuum from it's parent continuum within which the surrounding black hole that had formed.
Now if that is not enough since TIME was one of the materials that were issued forth by the white hole time in our time space continuum relative to that parent continuum moves at a much faster rate though as our time space continuum TSC eventually reaches entropy and the last of our matter and energy reach the event horizon of the surrounding black whole (which is really why they are accelerating rather than decelerating as the universe ages no phantom dark energy needed) the surrounding black hole itself succumb's to quantum evaporation - at the very same time as it's universe TSC is succumbing to it's own entropy and probably being destroyed by it's surrounding black whole (which is probably in another older TSC were time moves even slower - and another around that and another around that and inversely perhaps a white hole for every true black hole that comes into being - if probably not for Hawking's depressing brown holes).

Of course the white hole itself inevitably created a surrounding black hole and even though these TSC's succumb eventually at some point that white hole may be eternal as it though the opposite of a black whole it obey's different law's once it came into being, indeed in the region closest to it the expansion (expulsion of time and energy) around it moves FASTER than the speed of light.

Hey add to this Alternative reality's, parallel reality's and other dimensions (though some of which we may some day be able to explore these other TSC's if we can find a way to circumvent the gravity and event horizons' that seperate us).

a reply to: PsychoEmperor

I love this thought experiment, however NOTHING means Nothing. The idea of "going into the nothing" 'makes no sense. This is a major problem with the idea that the Universe came from "nothing" that's simply not possible. Nothing CAN NOT exist because it's nothing. The MINUTE you start talking about "nothing existing" you are instantly making it "something"

But what if the only reason there is something is because of consciousness?
The only time you would have nothing is if consciousness ceased to exist.
Sounds like consciousness had to come first.

a reply to: carsforkids

And of course Consciousness affect's quantum event's, interesting if there is no direct link, perhaps you are correct.

Thank you LABTECH767,
I actually join you on the religious side.

"I am that I am" is so powerful and to me implies self creation.
I believe that god is the entire existence of the universe from beginning to end and as we have intelligence to use science to try and understand how things work the two do not have to contradict each other.
Alpha to Omega, Omega to Alpha, all things at all time.
I meant no disrespect.

Your proposal is similar to the ekpyrotic universe scenario of string theory where the universe was created by the collision of two branes. In this theory there was a big bang when the branes collided and a big crunch after energy dissipation where the branes collide again.

Thank you eManym,
I'll have to look that up.

a reply to: eManym

OR Three branes in superspace, gravity itself appears to be a non local force as it is millions of time's weaker than for example electrostatic attraction.
Time which has a kind of relationship with gravity as shown in the way that gravity affects and warps the TSC may itself also be of non local origin perhaps another brane.

originally posted by: Hammaraxx
a reply to: PsychoEmperor
Thank you for your reply.
You are very correct, you cannot go into nothing.

I know it's hard to imagine the "void", the "nothing", whatever word you chose to use to describe a state of absolutely no thing existing.

That is why I wrote "impossible magical position of the “outside observer” sitting in the nothingness prior to anything existing at all".

You're welcome! It's not "hard to imagine" it's impossible. VOID is NOT Nothing.... Void is Something. It's a void. if you have an "outside observer" you again have SOMETHING. you can't be "outside" of nothing. If there's nothing to be outside of.

The PROBLEM perhaps is with your definition. There was never and will never be "nothing" If you have an outside observer outside of a void, you still have something outside of something else. Even in a void there is something.

The MINUTE you try to describe "nothing" you instantly make it something.

FOR EXAMPLE: If I start telling you "ok by nothing I mean a void devoid of particles, devoid of life, devoid of anything" I've now created it... IT IS Something, and that something is "a void devoid of particles, devoid of life, devoid of anything" Therefore it is NOT "nothing"


I like scientific AND spiritual reasons and both ultimately admit that there was "always something" IN your religious understanding, the always something is a god, and "outside observer" according to science and now quantum physics they say "nothing is impossible because you have energy and particles even in a void"

MY ONLY POINT is there is no "nothing" there can never be a nothing. My Proof is that we are here and we are something. You can not derive something from nothing. If there was EVER nothing, there would still be nothing. We are here, ergo there was always something.

I believe it's MORE difficult to wrap your head around the idea of "always" and "something" to have no beginning is a tricky concept, because we are stuck in our Time explanation of things. However Nature, God, Science doesn't care about our ability to understand, Truth is Truth.

Truth= Something has and will always exist, there will NEVER and can never have been "Nothing"

TLDR: Sorry for going on a bit, I BELIEVE(correct me if I'm wrong) you are trying to explain how the UNIVERSE was created, but are mis-describing it as "something from nothing" If you're saying God Created the Universe and he did it by placing a single particle in a void, ok I understand your theory. However I would Argue you are saying "Something"(God) created "Something"(The Universe) and he did it be placing "Something"(a particle) inside of "Something" (a void)

a reply to: PsychoEmperor

Moving back to Carsforkid's comment removing Consciousness itself is ultimately the same thing as nothingness, the observer no longer exists so if there is no observer there is nothing to observe.
That said IT is a hypothetical scenario and for that reason it can and does exist in as much as the number ZERO exists.

a reply to: LABTECH767

And of course Consciousness affect's quantum event's, interesting if there is no direct link, perhaps you are correct.

You mean where the mind forced itself into a quantum mechanics experiment. lol
That's why I said it.

a reply to: carsforkids

Yes you are thinking of Schrodinger's cat (Guy need's referring to animal welfare) or the aperture slit test.

I do get what you are saying PsychoEmperor and the OP is just a thought experiment.
Just my thoughts about how God could have brought itself into existence all by itself.
By existing.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: PsychoEmperor

Moving back to Carsforkid's comment removing Consciousness itself is ultimately the same thing as nothingness, the observer no longer exists so if there is no observer there is nothing to observe.
That said IT is a hypothetical scenario and for that reason it can and does exist in as much as the number ZERO exists.

Consciousness is something, its' not the same thing as nothingness. If the argument is there was always consciousness, fine that's still "SOMETHING" Zero... is also something it's Zero. If I tell you have a "Zero Apples" that's something.... it's Zero Apples. If you can describe it in ANY WAY, it's not "nothing."

I may be going to deep for some here, my main point is that there is no "nothing" there never was and will never be a "nothing" there has always been something and there will ALWAYS be "something"

I'm not fighting on whether the something was consciousness, or particles, or a universe, or a particle less void, or a simulation theory, or a higher power, or an outside observer, call the something WHATEVER you wish, I'm only saying "Something has and will always exist"

a reply to: PsychoEmperor
That's cool if you want to call zero anything "something".
To me and I'm sure most people, zero anything is nothing at all.
They're just words.

originally posted by: Hammaraxx
I do get what you are saying PsychoEmperor and the OP is just a thought experiment.
Just my thoughts about how God could have brought itself into existence all by itself.
By existing.

Thank you sir! My opinion is that God or the outside observer or the "something" didn't bring itself into existence but simply has always existed. There is no "before something" We can call the something whatever you like, God or particles or consciousness etc etc etc.

My opinion is that SOMETHING has always existed. The problem with presupposing that something even needs to be created out of nothing is that it goes against the truth. Something can not come out of nothing.

For a moment lets assume God is the Alpha, the one the only. It would be my argument that God has always existed, He has no creation, he has no need to "create himself" because he always was. "I am that I am" not "I am because I created myself"

Simply "I AM" now THAT to me is a much more powerful and profound thing to try and wrap your head around.

a reply to: LABTECH767

the aperture slit test.

That's it yes! very mysterious.