homegrown theory of existance

i have a theory of existance and i need some open minded peoples thoughts on it:
everything is nothing and nothing is everything just like a thought or memory can hold colors, textures, and even smells. everything we know in existance is just an echo of a thought and every thought we have is just amplifying the echo that is our existance while possibly creating new echos of existances. like they say god always was and always will be and is inside of everyone just like nothing always was and always will be and is inside everyone (if this is correct). the nothing is everything and something in itself, it may be a creation of a higher power or god himself.

thoughts on it

I think it would help if you were more clear. So far as I can tell you're talking in circles.

everything is nothing and nothing is everything just like a thought
or memory can hold colors, textures, and even smells.

How does the second half of this sentence have anything to do with the first? The manner in which memory can "hold" these qualities doesn't appear to have any relation to "everything is nothing." What is memory? In a moment you say that thought echoes create that which is in existence. Where does memory come into play? Who's doing the remembering? Is memory its own thing, or is it merely a thought echo?

everything we know in existance is just an echo of a thought

Ok. What are thoughts? Who's thinking them? By what mechanism does the echo occur?

and every thought we have is just amplifying the echo that is our
existance while possibly creating new echos of existances.

...as if grooving them more deeply...ok. Or, if no groove exists, an "original" thought creates a "groove" to begin with. Or as you're calling it: "creating an echo." Ok. But we still don't know what thoughts are, who's having them, where or "in what" this echo is occuring, or what "existence" is. Presumably you're saying that "existence" is merely the fact of thoughts echoing, but without any idea of what you're suggesting thoughts are in the first place, this isn't much different from where you started: "everything is nothing." Ok. Sure. But what do you mean by that?

like they say god always was and always will be and is inside of everyone just
like nothing always was and always will be and is inside everyone (if this is correct).

Ok...but suddenly throwing god into all of this seems terribly random. Plus, if god "always is/was/willbe" then what does he have to do with these echoes you're talking about? They didn't exist until they were thought, right? Is god the one doing the thinking? Ok. Who's god? None of this is clear.

the nothing is everything and something in itself,
it may be a creation of a higher power or god himself.

...so are you saying that god created the nothingness that thoughts can create echos from? Why? What does god have to do with the echoes? Couldn't there be echoes without a god concept? Is god the one thinking the echoes? Are we human observers merely echoes created by the thoughts of god? Do we then, in turn, have the ability to have thoughts of our own that create echoes? Or if we can create echoes are we, by definition, god?

thoughts

I think it would help if you slowed down, defined your terms, and thought out your model more clearly.

im just saying thoughts and echos for lack of a better term but i mean to say they are there own entitie wich is everything in existance but "thoughts" consist of nothing.

oh and the god thing was to just possibly make some connection that it is "god" or the higher power so many speak of.

reminds me much of the Leap movie. Quantum etc.. explanantions. Quite interesting.

www.leapmovie.com...

I think you made a more poignant observation when you said:
"...everything is nothing and nothing is everything...." In essence, out of nothing comes all that ever can or will be, and to nothing everything goes. Existential string theory maybe? The Universe (Multiverse?) exists so that we can exist and ponder the infinite possibilities of existence? Then one has to consider the need to exist in the first place: "ignorance is bliss". If we were not here, there'd be no need to find meaning.

Sounds a bit like a "Chicken and Egg" theory. One had to come first, but would it be the thoughts or the memories? Something has to happen to cause an echo... but aren't they similar in nature? I mean, just as you cannot have an echo without sound, the echo is a sound as well. But unlike an echo, a thought and memory are dependent on the other's existence, you do not experience a memory until you realize you have thought it and the thought doesn't exist unless it is remembered. And then ... something had to exist in order to experience the thought / memory for the first time so that it is available to be remembered by itself and then something else has to exist in order to experience that at a later time, no?