MY ART MANIFESTO 7
In the previous article, we examined the amount of fixed, unchanging energy by an analogy of a beverage can. Now let’s examine the existence of energy by assuming that the amount of energy is not constant, but that it comes to the Big Bang by increasing gradually after it exists. Of course, this assumption would not only be a speculation, but also going out of science. However, many people think that the universe exists like this, except the related academics and people who know the subject well. In short, they think that energy increases gradually after it exists and after a while it explodes (Big Bang) and creates the universe. Therefore, in order to create a correct picture in minds, let me briefly mention this assumption, albeit unscientific.
The gradual increase in density of pure energy can happen in two ways. In the first one, there may be an external flow of energy, a supply, just like a pool is filled with water. However, this requires the explanation and description of where the external source of the incoming water is, which I don’t dwell on. In the second one, for the density to increase, there must be movement within itself. There is no movement, no vibration (frequency) in energy in singularity. There is no space for it to vibrate enabling the vibration move and swell by changing its intensity. So both of these are against Big Bang theory, but let’s ignore this anomaly and imagine that energy started from zero, increased in amount and came into existence, and let’s trace back to its beginning and see the result.
If we continue to go backwards as the energy decreases, we think that eventually the energy comes to the zero point where it started, to the point of non-existence, that is, the point called nothingness. However, this thought is wrong! Because there is no such thing as non-existence! In this case, when energy goes back to the beginning, it does not come to any non-existence or nothingness; it disappears or does not exist at all. In short, it loses its existence, that’s all. As a result, there is neither the universe, nor nothingness; neither non-existence, nor space, there is not anything remaining, and all become as they have never existed.
As you can see, it doesn’t matter whether energy begins its existence either from zero and increases, or its amount staying constant. Everything about the non-existence and existence we are talking about started with energy, there is no previous non-existence of energy. According to this result, if even non-existence did not exist, then energy cannot come into existence out of nothing. How can it exist out of nothing? So, in order to say that energy came into existence out of nothing, first of all, nothingness has to exist. Let’s get into this now. In the previous sections, I explained the concept of nothingness in detail. Here, I will examine the relationship of nothingness with science-based physical existence.
If you look at the situation with a rational eye, nothingness has the priority in the existence out of nothing, because saying that it came into existence out of nothing is talking about the pre-existing thing, arranging whatever it was before it did not exist and then it came into existence into an order. As such, logically, non-existence has to exist, and even non-existence has to exist first. Note, this is not a language or expression problem; such is the state of energy. Because we know that energy has a beginning. So, like everything that has a beginning, energy must have a pre-existing state, which is called non-existence. Now, let’s continue explaining what kind of nothingness we are we talking about.
Saying non-existent means that nothing exists, both scientifically and logically. Therefore, nothing should exist out of non-existent. So the ‘nothing’ we are talking about here must somehow be in the content from which a being will be formed. If not, nothing can come into existence out of ‘nothing’. That is, even if ‘nothing’ itself exists, if its structure is not suitable, if it is not absolute, nothing can come into existence out of ‘nothing’.
But what we call energy has come into existence. Then, if energy came into existence out of nothing, it means that that ‘nothing’ was suitable for the existence of energy in terms of content, at least it contained the condition where energy can exist. This shows that the mentioned ‘nothing’ is not actually absolute non-existence. Is the problem over? No, there are other dilemmas.
Let’s say the state of nothingness existed before energy. The problem is that nothingness or whatever else exists, if there is no energy or if it does not have a structure to generate energy, this universe would not exist. Let me use an analogy to make this clearer. Let’s say you are in a kitchen that is isolated from the outside world, and there are all kinds of food items in that kitchen, but no dried beans. If you don’t have beans, you can cook many kinds of dishes in that kitchen, but you can’t cook a bean dish.
So far, I have evaluated the ‘nothing’ in the phrase “came into existence out of nothing”. However, the ‘nothing’ of science and literature is very different. For this, let me quote from a book of American cosmology professor Sean Carroll.
“If the universe is expanding, what is it expanding towards? Nothing. When speaking of the universe, there is no need to speak of it expanding into something – that is the universe – it need not be in something else; this could be all that’s going on. We are not used to thinking that way, because all of the objects we experience in our daily life are contained in space; but the universe itself is space and there is no such thing as “outside”. Likewise, it doesn’t have to be an edge—the universe could be moving through space forever. Or, as a matter of fact, like the surface of a sphere, it could be finite and collect on itself. Considering the existing observations, we will very likely never know.” (Sean Carroll, Cosmological History of Time, p. 68)
As it can be seen, science does not evaluate (and finds doing it unnecessary) something that it does not assume existing, a situation called ‘nothing’, because science, all the laws of physics, started with the Big Bang. However, the same Big Bang theory tells us that the universe, that is, energy, had a beginning. If it has a beginning, it must also be a state before an instance, that is, non-existence. Now let’s see what happens by continuing with this way of thinking.
What happens when you say there was nothing but energy itself? First of all, the expression “energy came into existence” changes. The word “came into” cannot be used in this expression. You can only use the word “there is energy” or “there was energy”, because it came into, in the simplest sense, means “it happened”. In other words, it means that it was not there and it appeared somehow. Well, what would happen if we just explained “there is energy”, or as “it was”? Not much changes, because even if you say that energy was eternal, the situation that it had a beginning does not change. Therefore, it has no difference with the expression “it came into being out of nothing”.
Another handicap is as follows: let’s start from the theory that energy is nothing but itself. If you disable its pre-existing state, that is, its non-existent state, and put it in the “just so, somehow it came into existence” position, then automatically the state in which it was created becomes effective. Whatever the existing energy is, wherever it has come into existence, the conclusion says that it was created there, because anything that has a beginning cannot exist by itself unless its properties are suitable or the medium is suitable.
There’s also the other side of the coin. In whatever form it may exist, this energy has a structural feature of unimaginable possibilities. Whatever they are, a magnificent universe exists out of these features! Moreover, this universe cannot exist without any of these delicate features in energy. As you can see, we simply call it energy or singularity energy, but it’s not that simple. I will explain in detail in the following sections.
So far, I’ve only dealt with energy. However, all the physics laws that make up the universe out of energy are mathematical orders. So mathematics is an indispensable factor. Then a question arises: if the laws of physics are mathematical orders, what started in the Big Bang? Physics or Math? I will continue in the next section.
(Translated from Turkish by Semih AYDIN)