Why Is There Anything, Rather Than Nothing?

My theory is that there are not particles. Only forces. There are no bodies acting upon one another. It is just force acting upon another force. Scientists have not figured this out yet because they are not as amazing as me.

Everything in the universe is throught to be composed of matter. This is false. Everything is force. There is no substance. Just one force acting upon another. That's why these quantum physicists are so confused. They're baffled by the behavior of subatomic particles because there are no subatomic particles. Everything we ever thought was matter is nothing more than force. In order to understand the universe, we must get rid of the nonsense concept of matter.

We get into these sting theories and multiple realities. And multiple universes existing in the quantum world. I suggest that this is all bollocks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How do you know it isn't the other way around? What if forces don't exist, just particles?

How do you model a universe of matter, made out of particles, with no forces you can 'see' anywhere?
You understand, in an undirected graph, replacing every edge with a vertex and every vertex with an edge, preserves the original graph? You're saying the universe is a graph that's directed, by "forces", so you can't change vertices and edges?? The universe is asymmetrical somehow?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You cannot model a universe made of matter when the universe is not made of matter. It is made of forces. If this can be modeled through some kind of simulation, fine. If not, then, too bad.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

it isnt wise to close ones mind to all else, i do agree with half of that theory, but the other i do not understand...perhaps you could enlighten me on how forces, make up lets say, and apple? i am curious to see how this would work, because you may or may not be onto something

 

An apple does not exist as a solitary object. Think of an ocean. What we preceive as a particular entity is nothing more than varying degrees of force interacting among one another, and with everything. Forces hit other forces per say.

 

According to that proposition, you're establishing 2 things. You know what that means?
What if it says: "You cannot model a universe made of forces when the universe is not made of forces", now what?

What do you intend to use for the relation between the 2 things: 1) the universe is not made of matter, and 2) you can't model a universe made of matter? Otherwise it doesn't really say anything more than: "the universe might be made of matter, or it might not, then again it might be made of forces, or it might not".

 

Wrong. It says that the universe is not made of matter. You cannot model the universe after something it is not made of.

I don't know why that would be so difficult for you to get or how you could possibly derive all that other stuff from that statement.

 

This post is intentionally left blank.

 

Maybe nothing does not exist. Even the color black is something. Even unclear images and chaotic dreams must be something. Even mathematical law and psycho-linguistic constructs are something.

It makes more sense that everything in the universe is really made of fields. There are no particles really but only fields interacting with each other.