De ce există ceva mai degrabă decât nimic?

quantum vacuum fluctuations and the cosmological origin of the universe from nothing

In modern physics, the cosmological origin of the universe from "nothing" is understood not through the lens of philosophical absolute emptiness, but rather through the dynamic nature of the quantum vacuum. The discipline posits that a true void is physically impossible, as quantum mechanics dictates that even space at absolute zero contains irreducible ground-state energy. Consequently, "nothing" is conceptualized as a highly unstable quantum vacuum churning with "virtual particles" that continuously pop in and out of existence via "quantum vacuum fluctuations". The scientific tradition of linking these microscopic fluctuations to macroscopic genesis began with physicist Edward Tryon. In his pioneering 1973 paper in *Nature*, "Is the Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation?", Tryon introduced the "zero-energy universe hypothesis". He argued that if the universe's total net energy is zero—where the positive energy of matter is perfectly balanced by the negative potential energy of gravity—its spontaneous emergence would not violate the conservation of energy. Addressing the cause of this event, Tryon famously stated, "I offer the modest proposal that our universe is simply one of those things which happen from time to time". This framework was later advanced by prominent theoretical physicists such as Alexander Vilenkin and Lawrence Krauss. Vilenkin pioneered models in "quantum cosmology" demonstrating that the universe could emerge via "quantum tunneling from nothing". In his models, the universe tunnels through an energy barrier from a state devoid of classical space, time, and matter, governed purely by mathematical quantum laws. Distinctive concepts in this field—such as "zero-point energy," "quantum tunneling," and "virtual particles"—highlight a radical shift from classical causality. While a complete theory of quantum gravity remains elusive, modern physics maintains that because the quantum vacuum is inherently unstable, a spontaneously fluctuating nothingness is a mathematically coherent origin for the cosmos.

• evolutionorigin.com
• youtube.com
• bigthink.com
• wikipedia.org
• apologeticspress.org
• youtube.com
• reddit.com
• quora.com
• quora.com

Nasadiya Sukta Rig Veda commentary on the origin of existence and the void

Within the Vedic and later Vedantic traditions of Hinduism, the origin of the universe is approached not with dogmatic certainty, but with profound philosophical contemplation. The primary source for this perspective is the *Nasadiya Sukta* (the "Hymn of Creation"), found in the 10th Mandala of the *Rig Veda* (10:129). Composed by ancient Vedic seers and brought to global prominence by translators like Max Müller and A.L. Basham, the hymn remains a masterpiece of early metaphysical inquiry. Rather than depicting creation *ex nihilo* (out of an empty void) by a personal creator, the tradition posits a primordial state that defies conceptual binaries. The text famously opens by negating both existence (*sat*) and non-existence (*asat*): "Then, there was neither non-existence, nor existence". The "void" in this context is not an empty vacuum, but an undifferentiated state of unmanifest potential, poetically described as "darkness hidden by darkness" and a fathomless cosmic water (*apah*). From this absolute stillness emerged a singular, self-sustaining presence referred to as *Tad Ekam* ("That One"), which "breathed, windless, by its own impulse". The hymn details that existence began to unfold from this unity through *tapas* (primordial heat or cosmic energy), which was closely followed by *kama* (desire)—identified as the "first seed of mind". Distinctively, the *Nasadiya Sukta* embraces intellectual humility and agnosticism, suggesting that divinity itself is an emergent property of the cosmos. Overturning standard theistic models, it declares: "The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe". It concludes by cementing the ultimate unknowability of the universe's origins, asking: "Who really knows? Who will here proclaim it?" and resolving that the highest surveyor of the heavens "knows—or maybe even he does not know".

• wikipedia.org
• medium.com
• beezone.com
• blogspot.com
• medium.com
• boloji.com

metaphysics of Ayin and Yesh in Lurianic Kabbalah creation theory

In Jewish mysticism, particularly Lurianic Kabbalah, the concepts of *Ayin* (Nothingness) and *Yesh* (Somethingness or Existence) form the foundational ontological dichotomy of creation. Rather than viewing creation through the traditional philosophical lens of absolute *creatio ex nihilo* (making something out of an empty void), this discipline understands *Ayin* not as absence, but as the infinite, undifferentiated essence of God (*Ein Sof*). Because this boundless divine reality surpasses all human comprehension and lacks any finite definition, it is referred to paradoxically as "Nothingness". Thus, *Yesh* denotes the emergent, structured reality of the finite created universe. The mechanics of how *Yesh* emerges from *Ayin* were fundamentally reshaped by the 16th-century mystic Rabbi Isaac Luria. His teachings, systematically recorded by his disciple Rabbi Chaim Vital in texts such as *Etz Chaim*, introduced the radical doctrine of *Tzimtzum* (divine self-contraction). Luria theorized that because the infinite light of *Ein Sof* filled all existence, God had to withdraw into Himself to create a conceptual void (*chalal panui*). As one summary describes the process, "in order to make room for creation, Ein Sof had to first create a void inside itself, a space in which to make yesh (something) from ayin (nothing)". Within this void, the first manifestation of *Yesh* emerged as *Adam Kadmon* (the Primordial Man), which served as the mystical blueprint for all subsequent creation and the emanation of the *sefirot* (divine attributes). In this metaphysical framework, creation is not a physical building process but a deliberate veiling of the infinite to permit finite boundaries. The two states remain paradoxically intertwined; as 13th-century Kabbalist Azriel of Gerona articulated, "the something is in the nothing in the mode of nothing, and the nothing is in the something in the mode of something". This Lurianic dynamic later profoundly influenced Hasidic philosophy, which taught that the ultimate spiritual goal is *bittul ha-yesh* (self-nullification)—dissolving the ego to return the finite *Yesh* back into the divine *Ayin*.

• grokipedia.com
• grokipedia.com
• torahresource.com
• sparknotes.com

Leibniz principle of sufficient reason and the cosmological argument for contingency

In analytic philosophy, Leibniz’s cosmological argument from contingency is heavily scrutinized through the lens of modal logic and the logical entailments of explanatory principles. Rather than treating the argument merely as a historical artifact, contemporary analytic philosophers rigorously debate whether the existence of contingent things logically demands a necessary, self-existent being. **Key Figures and Texts** The analytic discussion traces its roots to Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who formulated the argument using his formulation of the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) in his *Monadology*. Samuel Clarke is also recognized for historically formalizing this contingency approach. In the contemporary analytic tradition, William Rowe provided pivotal formulations and critiques of the argument in *The Cosmological Argument* (1975). Recently, the argument has been robustly defended by Alexander Pruss, Richard Gale, and Joshua Rasmussen, while fiercely critiqued by analytic philosophers like Peter van Inwagen. **Distinctive Concepts** Analytic philosophy isolates the argument using precise terminology: * **Contingent vs. Necessary Beings:** Contingent entities could have failed to exist, whereas a necessary being must exist across all possible worlds. * **Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR):** The metaphysical "engine" of the argument. To avoid logical paradoxes, analytic defenders sometimes deploy a "Weak PSR" (e.g., Gale and Pruss), asserting merely that every contingent proposition *possibly* has an explanation. * **Brute Facts:** Contingent facts that simply have no explanation at all. * **The Big Conjunctive Contingent Fact (BCCF):** The aggregate set of all contingent facts in reality. Analytic philosophers ask what explains the BCCF, noting the explainer cannot be part of the set. **Disciplinary Position and Quotes** The analytic tradition remains divided. Defenders argue that denying the PSR undermines scientific and rational inquiry by allowing arbitrary "brute facts". Critics, notably van Inwagen, argue that a strong PSR leads to "modal collapse"—the implication that if the PSR is universally true, every proposition has an explanation, rendering all facts necessary and eliminating contingency entirely. Leibniz framed the foundation of this debate by stating, “no fact can be real or existing and no statement true without a sufficient reason for its being so and not otherwise” (*Monadology*, §32). William Rowe distills the modern analytic inquiry into this principle by asking: “Why does that set (the universe) have the members that it does rather than some other members or none at all?”.

• joshualrasmussen.com
• stanford.edu
• wikipedia.org
• weebly.com
• substack.com

dependent origination and the ontological status of phenomena in Madhyamaka philosophy

In the Madhyamaka school of Mahāyāna Buddhism, the ontological status of phenomena is defined by their profound lack of independent, inherent existence, a quality known as *svabhāva*. According to this tradition, things do not exist absolutely or autonomously; rather, they exist only conventionally, as products of causes, conditions, and conceptual designations. This framework rests on a central philosophical equivalence: dependent origination (*pratītyasamutpāda*) is conceptually identical to emptiness (*śūnyatā*). The foremost figure in this tradition is the 2nd-century Indian philosopher Nāgārjuna, who systematically articulated these ideas in his foundational text, the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way). Nāgārjuna posited that because everything is dependently originated, everything must be "empty" of intrinsic essence. In Chapter 24, verse 18 of the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā*, he famously declares: "Whatever is dependently co-arisen / That is explained to be emptiness. / That, being a dependent designation, / Is itself the middle way". Later influential figures, such as Candrakīrti, elaborated on this by arguing that recognizing the interdependent nature of phenomena corrects the innate human cognitive distortion of perceiving essential properties in objects, which Buddhism identifies as the root of suffering. Distinctive Madhyamaka terminology hinges heavily on this relational ontology. *Svabhāva* represents the falsely perceived self-nature or essence of things. *Śūnyatā* (emptiness), importantly, is not nihilistic voidness, but rather the very structure of interdependence itself. This relational understanding establishes the doctrine of the Two Truths. Conventional truth (*saṃvṛti-satya*) accepts the functional, dependently arisen world of everyday experience, while ultimate truth (*paramārtha-satya*) recognizes that all such phenomena are completely empty of inherent essence. Ultimately, Madhyamaka concludes that the ontological status of all phenomena is an interdependent, essence-less web, navigating a "middle way" that avoids both the extreme of eternalism (things inherently exist) and nihilism (things do not exist at all).

• encyclopediaofbuddhism.org
• wikipedia.org
• grokipedia.com
• tandfonline.com
• tharale.blog

Ibn Arabi doctrine of Wahdat al-Wujud and the manifestation of existence from non-being

In Islamic mysticism (Sufism), the doctrine of *Wahdat al-Wujud* (Unity of Being or Oneness of Existence) provides a profound metaphysical framework for understanding the emergence of reality. Most famously articulated by the 13th-century Andalusian philosopher and mystic Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi, this ontological doctrine asserts that God (Allah) is the absolute, singular source of true Being (*Wujud*). Within this tradition, the manifestation of existence is not viewed as a discrete act generating distinct entities ex nihilo, but rather as an eternal process of divine self-disclosure (*tajalli*). Central to this is the interplay between reality and *adam* (non-being). Ibn Arabi argues that contingent things possess no independent reality and inherently belong to non-existence. The phenomenal world and human consciousness serve merely as mirrors or places of manifestation (*mazhar*) reflecting the Divine names and attributes. This paradigm is central to Ibn Arabi's seminal texts. In *Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam* (The Ringstones of Wisdom), he declares: “The contingent things actually belong to non-existence (ʿadam), for there is no existence except the existence of the True one...”. Furthermore, in his magnum opus *al-Futūḥāt al-Makkīya* (The Meccan Revelations), he emphasizes: “It is established among the seekers of truth... that nothing exists except God and, even if we exist, our existence is only through Him. The one whose existence is due to something else, is in reality non-existent”. Distinctive terminology underpins this worldview. The cosmos acts as a *barzakh* (an isthmus or imaginal realm) bridging the Absolute and the limited, effectively mediating between existence and non-being. Because everything apart from God is functionally non-existent, believing in an existence truly separate from the Divine contradicts *tawhid* (monotheism) and borders on *shirk* (idolatry). Therefore, the spiritual culmination for the Sufi is *fana* (annihilation of the self)—a state of realization where the illusion of independent existence falls away, revealing that creation is simply the continuous illumination of Divine reality upon the canvas of nothingness.

• gettherapybirmingham.com
• wikipedia.org
• medium.com
• umt.edu.pk

John Wheeler it from bit hypothesis and the participatory universe information theory

John Archibald Wheeler, one of the most prominent theoretical physicists of the twentieth century, posited that the foundation of physical reality is rooted not in continuous matter or fields, but in discrete information. Viewing quantum mechanics through the lens of information theory—originally pioneered by mathematician Claude Shannon—Wheeler proposed that the cosmos is fundamentally an information-theoretic structure. Wheeler crystallized this view in his 1989 paper, “Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links,” where he introduced his famous "it from bit" hypothesis. This concept asserts that every physical entity (every "it") derives its existence from the answers to apparatus-elicited binary choices or yes/no questions (the "bits"). In Wheeler's own words: “It from bit symbolises the idea that every item of the physical world has at bottom... an immaterial source and explanation; that what we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes-no questions... in short, that all things physical are information-theoretic in origin and this is a participatory universe”. The notion of a "participatory universe" drastically elevates the role of the observer. Influenced by the quantum philosophy of his mentor Niels Bohr, Wheeler argued that observers are not passive bystanders but active co-creators whose acts of measurement actualize physical reality. To illustrate this "observer-participancy," Wheeler devised the "delayed-choice experiment," a variation of the classic double-slit experiment. It suggested that an observer's present-day measurement could effectively determine the past state of a quantum system, meaning reality is a dynamic web cumulatively built by conscious data collection. Wheeler's synthesis of quantum mechanics and information theory proved revolutionary. By arguing that physical properties emerge purely from informational transactions, he helped galvanize the modern field of quantum information science—paving the way for developments in quantum computing, quantum teleportation, and insights into black hole entropy and the holographic principle. Ultimately, Wheeler redefined the universe as a "grand interplay of questions... and answers," driven at its core by the mechanics of information.

• medium.com
• mindmatters.ai
• johnhorgan.org
• themarginalian.org
• wikipedia.org
• medium.com
• maths.org
• quantamagazine.org

Plotinus and the emanation of the many from the One in Neoplatonic cosmology

In the landscape of classical Greek philosophy, Neoplatonism emerged as a sweeping metaphysical synthesis. Founded by Plotinus (204–270 CE) and preserved by his student Porphyry in the six volumes of the *Enneads*, this tradition integrated Platonic ontology with Aristotelian and Stoic influences. However, while Stoicism posited a largely material cosmos governed by an immanent rational logic, Plotinus departed from this by developing a strictly immaterial, hierarchical cosmology rooted in profound soul-body dualism. At the heart of Plotinus’s system are three foundational *hypostases* (levels of reality): the One, the Intellect (*Nous*), and the Soul (*Psyche*). The ultimate source of all existence is "the One" (*to Hen*), an absolutely simple, ineffable unity that exists "beyond essence" (*epekeina tēs ousias*) and defies all categories of being and non-being. Crucially, Plotinus rejected the orthodox notion of *creatio ex nihilo* (creation out of nothing). Instead, he argued that the multiplicity of the universe derives from "emanation"—a spontaneous, necessary, and continuous overflowing of the One's absolute perfection. Using a venerable metaphor, Plotinus likens the One to a sun that "emanates light indiscriminately without thereby diminishing itself", or to a perpetually overflowing fountain. The first emanation is *Nous* (the Divine Mind), which contains the Platonic Forms and represents the initial transition from pure unity into the duality of thinker and object. From *Nous* emanates the *Psyche* (World Soul), which acts as an intermediary that generates and animates the physical material world—the lowest, least perfect, and most fragmented manifestation of the One. Despite this fragmentation, Neoplatonism insists that an underlying unity connects all things. The philosophy is fundamentally soteric and practical: it aims to reverse the downward procession of emanation. Echoing the Stoic emphasis on virtue and rigorous self-discipline, Plotinus taught that through philosophical contemplation and purification, the individual soul can achieve an upward ascent, ultimately culminating in *henosis*—an ecstatic, mystical union with the transcendent One.

• utm.edu
• fabriziomusacchio.com
• muslimphilosophy.com
• wikipedia.org
• fabriziomusacchio.com
• philoparadoxia.com
• rackcdn.com
• medium.com