PowerPoint
One basic question overwhelmed my entire existence: “How did all this begin?I researched this question over 25 years ago and am now 31. Science was usually my first subject. when i was older i used to spend hours in high school talking about my musings and speculations with my science teachers after school. I continued to do this anyway when I went to college. That day I absorbed three months of speculation. The most famous of these is the theory of how things appear. However, the main credit I wish to give to the theory of how things appear is that they can be visualized; It could be unreal. What keeps the theory of the origin of the universe alive is that, by all accounts, there is logically corroborating evidence that points to it as an unparalleled illustration. I would say that all the same evidence that seems to support the mega-eruption could support other speculations. The only sticking point for me is the ‘pre-cycle’. What was there before privacy exploded? Where did all this energy come from? We are talking, all things considered, of almost all the energy contained within all the matter in the universe; As well as all the free energy that goes through this field.
The oscillating universe hypothesis is fascinating, except that it faces a similar problem; Anticipating there ever was really a start. If the universe exists statically, then that is a conceivable hypothesis. It seemed similar to what was expected from the stable hypothesis. The idea that the universe has always existed and will always exist, as it has always existed. The main change in this model is the distances between the systems, the growth of different elements with the elaboration of new material; So the universe still looks identical in all directions. The big problem with this hypothesis is that we realize that the universe is not permanent. It grows and changes. We are aware that stars explode, run out of fuel, disappear or hit something special. This universe we live in is an exceptionally strong place. The influence of the worlds, the influence of the constellations of planets, planets and moons, and a large number of elements can suddenly collide with each other. Every last fragment moves to the music of gravity in the sky. Everything focuses on anything but a consistent state.
What I will offer in this article is an idea that I have kept for a long time. It is a hypothesis that I trust and it has helped me better understand our universe. It also goes beyond the point of staying “on top”. As I see it, there are only two current hypotheses that verify this. There is my hypothesis about a universe out of nothing and there is a hypothesis about God. As hard as it is to concentrate, I can’t think of another solution. Either my hypothesis is correct, or the correct hypothesis has not been formed, or God is responsible for everything. These were the decisions I made for myself and until further notice I will stand by my decisions. My goal now is to get my hypothesis out into the world and trust that it is a good one. I accept that this premise fully embodies all the losing ends in existence. I also agree that it’s a great theory about how things come to be. With a reasonable understanding of our starting points, we will want to gain a full understanding of the inner workings of our existence. I would also like to add that I referred to my speculation as a hypothesis because I accept that the vast majority of the evidence on the mass detonation side could also be used to aid my speculation.
the evil universe
We know everything about our human idea of ​​nothing. We say at the point where the container is empty; “Nothing on it.” We note that this is not really the case. What we are implying is that the way our thought process should be no longer exists. Without a good reason to actually be in the jar, the actual jar must have a vacuum. The void is the ultimate fault of the case. This would be a perfect vacuum. Of course, space is not a perfect vacuum, and it is difficult to say that a perfect vacuum does not exist. Anyway, the void is the true idea of ​​a thing, but it is not the true kind of nothingness. What I’m talking about is that our idea of ​​nothingness and the actual kind of nothingness are two different things. The real condition of the matter is impartiality.