On The Reality Of Existence

Abstract:
The consensus in modern science and cosmology is that in the very initial moment of the universe it was completely empty and instead it was a spacetime singularity, this is usually called as The Big Bang. But the physical definitions of such a physical phenomena are still awaiting to be defined, and we cannot just regard it as being nothing not just because we want to know what it is and not what it is not, but also because this even worsens the problem of how the universe actually turned into being. But the truth is that this empty singularity was the core universe itself and the core reality, and delving into more detail of this might give us a much more complete understanding of the reality and the universe, and even show us the correct approach towards religion.

Introduction Ever since people wondered on what is the reality and the universe, and in fact this is the driving engine behind most if not all sciences, but most specifically it is the driving engine behind physics and cosmology. While modern science clearly made advances in this direction, no one can say with confidence that it has been completely clarified. Besides science there were also many attempts by philosophy and religion to solve this mystery, but most attempts by this sector have been completely rejected by science as not being scientific based.

And in fact for most of it the claim is correct since religion mostly introduces a set of mystical objects that cannot be explained and proved, but even if one would accept these theories we would not stay in any better position since and instead we would just have added another topic that we still have to understand what it is. But as in all understandings the key to unveil the mystery is by unleashing the upper layers of reality such as our everyday experience, so we will be able to get to the core layer of reality, as the famous saying goes can't see the forest for the trees.

I. THE UNIVERSE AND THE REALITY

A. The Problems Suppose there is a time in reality in which the universe was completely empty (and in fact this is what science considers to be the very first moment of the universe), the question what we might ask is what was in the universe at this moment? B. Attempt To Claim Nothing Of course the very first response that might come up is that in such a moment there is nothing in the universe. But let us first clarify the definition of nothing and see if this is indeed an answer. Let us conduct a simple though experiment. Suppose we are in an empty room with no windows to look out, and inside the room there are just a few everyday objects such as a table and a chair. Let us make a list of what it is not there in the current moment, this list will shortly become very long and it will grow up infinitely, since anything that is not in the current time or in the this room is considered as not being there. As such we will find that this room (with a few exceptions) contains almost nothing and it is not that much better from an empty universe that is also nothing. Now let us concentrate on one of the objects in the room, say for instance the table, and let us ask ourselves what is the table not?. We will very soon have an endless list since it is only a table and nothing besides it. As such are we to say that a table is nothing? Or are we to say that an empty universe is nothing because it is not even a table? Of course the answer is that we cannot focus on what an object is not, and we have instead to focus on what it is.

In fact this is what reality is all about, as there are only existing objects, and there is nothing that does not exist, and the entire concept of not is only the fruit of our imagination that makes us think that something that would able to exist is not in existence. As such the correct answer to the question of what is the table not? would be that the question is ill formatted, and there is no such thing as not. But with that defined and after we learned to focus on what is? rather on what is not? we can no longer claim an empty universe to be nothing since we have to find what it is and not what it is not, and as such we remain with our original problem of what is the universe when it is completely empty? 1. What Caused The State Change

Another problem that arises by claiming an empty universe to be nothing is what caused the universe to change from its initial nothing state to its current state. We cannot come up with a law of physics that turned the universe into existence, since if there was nothing then there were not even physics laws, and as such the law itself is falling in the same problem. Furthermore, physics laws are usually based on cause and effect, but if there was nothing there is no cause at all! To illustrate the problem further, suppose that there is a possibility that the universe will ever be destroyed and return to an empty state, does this implies that a universe will be recreated and that it will be identical or similar to the current universe? Or are we to say that a state of nothing introduced after there was already a universe is different than nothing before there was a universe? C. Reality To answer the question let us take again a table as an example and let us take a deeper thought on it. While we can consider it as being a table and we can say for example I have put something on the table, we can just as well call it a reality and we can say for example I have put something on this reality (although this is not as familiar as the previous statement). In fact everything in existence can be described using the term reality. And this brings up an interesting question, is reality just an abstract concept with no existence on its own and instead it is just a concept useful for describing the universe, or is it an existing reality having its very own unique existence and properties. Logically speaking it makes sense claiming that reality is a reality, at least more than a claim that reality is not a reality.

But of course we need to have stronger proof in order to completely verify the answer, and our best way to do it is by examining what is the reality of any object whether it is the object or the reality of it. For instance if we are to use a table for an example then we will ask ourselves is the table more a table or more a reality? To answer this we will have to separate the object part of the object (such as the table and its physical definition and properties) from the reality part of the object, and we have two ways to do it: 1) By attempting to find an object without reality 2) By attempting to find reality without any farther definition or object description

1. Objects Without Reality While it is not hard to find objects without reality such as images and the like, they are of course not useful for our purpose here since we want something that would have all properties of a regular object but without reality. The closest that we can come to find such thing, is by using imagination and fantasy in which case we can recreate any object without all its property (and in a fantasy or dream the imagined object is actually thought to be real) but without actual reality. While such object has all properties identical to a real object, still no one will regard it as a true object, thereby showing that the physical part of the object is not the existence of the object. 2. Reality Without Object Definition Now we will attempt to find a reality without any physical and logical definition, and see if it is in existence. While at the first glance it might sound impossible to find such, note that an empty universe which we initially regarded as nothing but is in fact in existence will clearly answer this requirement since it has no properties and no definitions but it is in reality and thus we can consider it as a reality. As such we have found the answers to most of our problems so far, by understanding that: 1) Reality is something realistic on its own without any farther physical or logical definition or properties 2) An empty universe is in fact this core reality 3) Instead of the default state of the universe being nothing, is has a default state of reality 4) Even all other objects are more a reality than a object (in other words objects can change different forms or completely lose all of its properties and definitions but still staying in reality, and on the other hand an object with all definitions and properties but without reality such as a imagination or fantasy is not regarded as reality)

The last point might require a bit more explanation, which I will do here. While we have already showed that an object in imagination although it might contain the exact same properties as real object are still not considered as real as long it is not real, we might still show farther that even for real objects the only core part of it is the reality. In order to show that, let us consider an object that has been painted to a given color. While the object as of now has this given color it might anytime be changed to another color without altering the object itself (although we will not able to use the color as one of the properties of the object), as such while there is no object without a color we can still say with confidence that an object is more object than color. But if we are to change the object shape we might still consider it to be the same (although it might lose some physical properties), further more we might even change the chemical components of the object and it will stay in reality, and as such we might say that an object is more reality than object with the definition of object as physical properties (since reality has no physical properties and is therefore not considered as an object). We can take this concept further, to show that upon destruction of an object only the physical properties of it are destroyed however the reality of it remains but without any physical properties (which is what ordinary people would considered as being nothing). This might make sense for a physicist that already knows from the conservation of energy, or for a chemist that already knows that no elements can completely be destroyed, and in general terms we might consider it as the conservation of everything.

D. The Universe In fact we might have another answer to our initial problem of what is an empty universe, by claiming that an empty universe is the core universe itself. But after a deeper thought we can realize that reality (or existence) and the universe are in essence one and the same. E. Properties Of Reality And The Universe To show that reality and the universe is in fact one and the same thing, we first have to elaborate on the properties of reality and the universe. 1) Reality must be the very first thing in the universe and there might be nothing that predates it, farther more even when there are other things in the universe all exists within the boundaries of reality and there might be nothing outside of it. 2) Reality must exist every time, everywhere and anywhere.

3) Also even after objects were added to reality it has not been changed and it stays the same way as before (something that makes sense when we consider that in the dark, the universe looks the
same even after objects were added, and the fact that when there is light the universe looks different is just due to the different colors which are in essence just a reflection of the light, and had there been no reflection [i.e. All objects are black] then the universe would always look the same).

This is due to what we have already seen (section I.C) that an object is more reality than object which means that nothing is adding to reality. To understand it better one might note that reality and universe might essentially be interpreted as everything or infinity, and when one is adding to infinity we cannot say that anything has been changed. 4) Furthermore everything in existence must be made of reality as we have already shown (section I.C). 5) Also the laws of physics are there just because reality, as there is no other reasons to the laws of physics and cause and effect besides that this is the reality, and in fact the laws of physics are just the description of how objects behave in reality and in essence we can rename the laws of physics to laws of reality. 6) Even with the laws of physics at work still reality remains the only boss, and nothing can exist or happen without reality agrees on it, and nothing can go against reality. 7) While reality can in no way be human and has no physical properties (and in fact most people would initially regard it by mistake as nothing), it must be superior to everything that humanity has, such as life, freewill and wisdom, since all of these concepts are existing in reality and are made out of reality. One can easily see that all of the same properties can also be said on the universe since the universe must be the first and all objects are part of the universe and inside of it, indeed showing that reality and the universe are indeed the same, and in fact for any of the properties discussed so far we can substitute the term universe for the term reality and the meaning will still remain unchanged. But there is another point to notice that the same properties are exactly identical to what religious text are describe as god, and in fact for any of the properties discussed so far we can substitute the term god for the term reality and the meaning will still remain unchanged And it makes again sense to say that reality and the universe and god are one and the same. 1. An Analogy Using The Human Mind To give a more real life example to all of these properties, consider an analogy of the human logical mind when fantasizing. While in the fantasy one might introduce many objects they are made out of the mind itself, and even after there are (imaginary) objects still the mind is not becoming greater whatsoever.

Furthermore while objects in a fantasy usually behave according to the laws of physics, there is nothing that forces the mind to do so and it is completely by will, furthermore even with the laws of physics at work the mind is still the only boss. F. What caused The Universe Now we are in a much better position to explain what has caused the universe into being, since the default state of the universe is no longer nothing instead it is the reality and the universe which is the source for all laws of physics and behaviors. And as such we at least have the cause (the reality) that produced the effect (the current state of the universe). But to understand the law that governed it, we have to consider that all laws of physics are nothing more than observed patterns of reality, and as such if we observer that the universe turned from the core reality into a full blown universe, then we must just add it to the laws of physics. (To understand that better, consider the fact that the initial interpretation why objects are falling down to the earth was that because objects are heavy and as such objects are falling towards the earth where they come to rest. While this might be the first logical reaction to the understanding of the universe it is indeed wrong, and instead the inertial law of motion and the gravitational laws are governing the motion of objects, something that it is based on observation and not the initial thought.) 1. Will This Happen Again But if we are to add it as a physics law, then the following question (Section I.C.1) naturally arises. Suppose if the universe is ever destroyed and returns to what people think of as nothing (which is actually the core reality), will then a universe be automatically created? And if so will it have the same form as it is now? The answer of course is, that while we have seen once that the universe happened there is further guarantee on the next case since in general laws of physics are established based on observed patterns and not on a single case. The most that we can say is that there is such a chance but we cant say anything beyond this. As such there would also a possibility that the universe in its current form is not the first version of it, and it might already have been a universe which was then destroyed and recreated. However it appears to me that since we cannot differentiate between the reality (or nothing) at the beginning of the universe, and the reality (or nothing) at the end of the universe, then we must say that they are in effect the same, (which again makes sense). And as such the universe would at its end just return to the beginning, and this especially makes sense since for an empty universe not just there is no space but also no time.

And as a result there will not be another universe, instead it is just getting back to the beginning point of the universe (but note that it is not like the universe will happen again just that we are being back at the same time, similar to the concept that time travel tries to impose on the universe). If this is true then we may say with certainty that there was never another universe before this one, and there will never be.

II. IMPLICATIONS
A. Paradise And Hell Let us see think again for a moment and find an answer to the following question what is the worst thing on earth? Ask it for any person and the answer might be one of the two following 1) Death 2) Destruction of the universe. But if we think deeper to find out what is wrong with these situations we will find the answer that in these situations the person or the universe is entering a state of nothing or destruction or just out of control. In fact everything that is considered bad is basically a result of things getting out of control, not getting to what a person wants, or loosing something that one had already, all of which are in essence the same concept as we have just described.
(Even physical pain is not much of a problem without having one of the above-mentioned as part of it, while getting chemotherapy to cure cancer isnt regarded as good it is still better then getting it for torture purposes, and would certainly be even better if the person taking the chemotherapy would be paid a fortune for every second of it. Or consider working, while working because of slavery is really bad it is good if one is doing it from freewill and it is even better if one is getting paid a fortune for it. As such it turns out that even physical pain is not regarded as being bad unless it is psychological pain as well.)

But we have already seen (section I.B) that nothing is a wrong description, and instead it is the reality (section I.C) and the universe (section I.D)! And if we have seen that nothing is considered the worst thing, and the reason for it is the absence of reality and control, it follows that reality and the universe must be the best thing ever! As such depending on how realistic ones point of view, death and the end of the universe might be the worst thing ever or the best thing ever! And there is no intermediate option.
(Even a person with a negative attitude towards god and religion which is a result of misunderstanding the concept that we have learned so far- will certainly not want to miss the opportunity of merging with god, this is especially true when considering the only other option available.)

B. Religion

While the concepts so far are clear, there are two practical problems that arise as a result: 1) Is there a way for a person that is not realistic to become realistic? 2) While a non-realistic person has no problem claiming to be realistic and many do, is there a way to prove whether one has the correct realistic approach or not? Of course there must be a set of steps in order to achieve the needed realistic view, and just as well there must be a set of proofs that will determine whether one is realistic or not. These steps are collectively regarded as religion, and it is the way that a person can achieve and proof the correct approach to reality which we have shown (section I.E) to be god. 1. Which Religion As a matter of fact there are many religions outside there, so the question arises are all the religions equally good or there is one specific religion? And if so which one is it? To show that not all religions can be equally valid, we can use the fact that many religions are applying physical qualities to god, applying godly qualities to human, or applying physical qualities to paradise and hell, all of which must be regarded as being wrong and leading away from reality, since we already know that god, paradise and hell are what most people incorrectly define as nothing. But to answer the question of which religion is valid will be easy for one grown up on the concepts of evidence based science and the laws of physics, since there is one and only one religion claiming to proof the religion in front of millions of people and with many proof all of which are claimed to halt temporarily the laws of physics showing godly qualities, (furthermore many other religions are also believing that to be true). No other religion even attempts to go in that direction, which clearly shows that this religion takes the reality approach and anyone deciding for that religion must be taking the reality approach and anyone deciding in favor of any other religion cannot be claimed so (and of course believing in something just because ones parents told so or because one will be punished for thinking otherwise does not bring closer to reality).