What came first, Nothing or Something?

I don't think we can examine the question in relation to the universe. Space, time, light, energy all exist within the context of the universe. We, however, have no way of knowing what, if anything, exists outside of the universe.

The conclusion that I came to years ago is that the human species is incapable of truly conceptualising this concept.

What came first, Nothing or Something?

Here is an example:

Matter/Antimatter.

There is always something in nothing.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I would say something came first, because without something there cannot be nothing. Similar to how there is a measurement for heat, but not really for cold. Cold is really just a measurement of the absence of heat.

Similarly the egg obviously came first, because evolution makes that possible.

I do no think nothingness exists..there is always somethingness...

originally posted by: Bicent76
well to expand on this further...

We exist in something that is not our technology...

So we can question what came before that?

The biggest unanswered question I have is how...

If I had one wish it would be how... I think if we were ever given the answer to that we would lose our purpose to be what we are... I also think that is the point of our existence...

meh anyhow I like this thread... Reminds me of old ATS, I like posting in this thread...

I really like your thoughts and appreciate you appreciating this thread. Ha!

I was thinking that the idea of Nothing -- which seems like would be all of reality (if not for the fact that there is 'Something') -- is an idea that is not dependent on any 'mind' that came before us. It is an idea that no one had because no one existed in Nothingness. Something is simply necessary for Nothing to be a reality -- and that's the only alternative to Something.

Something had to exist to make Nothing a reality. Nothing could not be defined without it. And both have to be perpertual because no mind existed to create the idea. So both states have always existed in perpetual time.

Perhaps dark matter is Nothing and moves freely through Something because Something could never destroy it without destroying itself...and vice versa?

And the idea of relying on duality for existence makes sense with what we know as humans on earth. Man and woman perpetuating life leaps to mind, obviously. Like our interdependence on one another to perpetuate life is just a reflection of the universal function.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

it is indeed a perplexity, and if we are to ever attract intelligence other than ours, this is the language...



have a good night dear... Don't stop imagining..

a reply to: Bicent76

Now can we finally get into context on how we can look at Nothing?

Considering something cannot come from nothing, I'd assume something has always been here.

Or, whatever, I'm here in existence, might as well celebrate winning the lottery

a reply to: Xtrozero

** "nothing" only exists when you are UN-conscious. as soon as you awake you hear Dead Weather and THAT is 3-dimensional [ Thing + Background + Observer ] ...

a reply to: Bicent76

** for 6 days "god" struggled with creating the universe, then on the 7th day he screwed it all up worse than Volkswagen with their Trick to tell the gas-testers the car is in same state as on the road. then on the EIGHTH day our MOTHER came along and said "Let there be Jack" and the universe Screamed out "Love is Blindness" and rushed around killing each other. god was pleased, and told everyone "See i told you i was perfect and know Everyhing", now we can all go have another Cup of Coffee....

originally posted by: coder
I don't think we can examine the question in relation to the universe. Space, time, light, energy all exist within the context of the universe. We, however, have no way of knowing what, if anything, exists outside of the universe.

The conclusion that I came to years ago is that the human species is incapable of truly conceptualising this concept.

If Our universe was formed 13,79 billion years ago, it means something existed before Our universe did.

What that something is and is not can be depicted by reasoning.


"Nothing" is the same as infinite, but only in one form, and that is infinitely small. Something can not be infinitely small as finite Space time.

Infinitely small is the same as infinitely large. Because both have the same background to the observer. If you were the observer. What would be the first thing you would observe?

Would it even be possible for you to observe something that is infinitely small at first glance? No, that would be impossible, because something that is infinitely small dont occupy any Space time. Because no matter how much or for how long you zoom in, you will never see the Object that is infinitely small...... even if you though you knew where to look. So in other Words infinite small dont exist.

For something to exist for the observer that something must first occupy Space and time. Because the observer occupies Space and time.


The singularity dident exist until it occupied Space and time. The obervers "We" occupy time and Space within the time and Space of the singularity. We are surrounded by the time and Space of the expanding singularity AND the time and Space which surround the expanding singularity.

a reply to: MotherMayEye
Something always was, for it could never, not have been. There has always been something. What was there before this? That has always been the big question. At least for me.

"One cannot exist without other".

Meaning that when you have one of anything, you have to have another something. The "quanta" of nothing is something itself. Its self validating.

a reply to: MotherMayEye


"Ø" is a place holder , it is not really there. The illusion is "something" yet something comes from nothing ^_-.

originally posted by: spy66

If Our universe was formed 13,79 billion years ago, it means something existed before Our universe did.

I think we can only see back to the torus vortex we exited on the last cycle around a perpetual torus path.

I don't believe it takes an observer or a mind for the idea of Nothing to exist. And because it exists without any observer or mind, Something must exist, too, to define it as Nothing.

And that Something must perpetual -- so everything in it is exactly the way it needs to be for Something to be perpetual.

Time has to be the first dimension. The first and second dimensions could never intersect without time existing first. How can they intersect without time to intersect in? They couldn't.

But they did intersect and so did the third dimension. So time had to exist first.

And Nothing had to exist in a state of time. That means Something was necessary to define it in a state of time, regardless of whether anything observed it or had the idea...or not.

In fact, no mind could have existed in a state of Nothingness to 'create' Something. No 'mind,' nor God, nor Creator is behind why we are here and why here is here.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Nothing doesn't seem to exist in our reality...
Always there must have been something..

I can feel my head starting to hurt .

a reply to: rigel4

I think when we sleep, we have a chance to slip into this nothingness past the "ether" into other universes. Ive had dreams of strange universes during this state. It is frightening yet curious because you just simply drift, but not really recognizing anything.

However there is something about nothingness that seems familiar, its hard to grasp the concept, but when original state, of nothingness. You dont really see or feel anything, nor think anything, but you know alot.

Nothingness supersedes chaos -supersedes -light=supersedes- darkness because chaos, light and darkness is something, they don't really exist and are illusions.


"The Matrix Theory" "There is no spoon"

a reply to: MotherMayEye

The Something, ever expanding in the boundless Nothing.

But then, realizing we exist in a finite Universe, this Universe has limits, it has been counted.

So we come to a point that this Universe, will be Perfected, that kind of changes the Big Picture.

We are, this is, that, that must be. We are just a part of the evolution of the Universe, what great things are yet to be.

originally posted by: OOOOOO
a reply to: MotherMayEye

The Something, ever expanding in the boundless Nothing.

But then, realizing we exist in a finite Universe, this Universe has limits, it has been counted.

So we come to a point that this Universe, will be Perfected, that kind of changes the Big Picture.

We are, this is, that, that must be. We are just a part of the evolution of the Universe, what great things are yet to be.

Yes. I very much agree with what you said, it echos my own thoughts!

To expound on what you said, 'entropy' is the death of the Universe according to the laws of thermodynamics. But we are driven by a 'survival of the Universe' instinct. Entropy means that all of the matter in the Universe will eventually spread out so far that the forces that cause energy -- like gravitation -- will no longer be propagated.

Perhaps we are perfectly in existence so that energy can propagate ITSELF. An intelligent energy. Able to evolve to a point of intelligence that's no longer dependent on matter, but would not have happened without matter (before matter succumbed to natural entropy, that is).

Maybe energy will evolve intellectually to defeat entropy through an evolved intelligence and defy the natural laws of physics?

What great things await us, indeed!

The Nothing can not be measured, it has no dimension, it is neither large nor small.

Time, the forth dimension is simply, the movement of a 3 dimensional object, in a 3 dimensional space.

It is not possible to be in the Nothing, as there is Nothing there, Nothing, no space to be in. The One is not in the Nothing, the One simply is. That which has always been and will always be.

So the answer to the question is, there was no first.