Certainly, it is fundamental to demonstrate how this Nothing, this spherical point still in antagonistic time, became a geometric space with a reference, causing the universal space to appear and beginning existential time.

It is now necessary, therefore, to delimit the essence of Nothing and then to give Nothing a precise and true concept.

On the essence of Nothing, it should be noted that even though Nothing had a spherical shape, Nothing was not a sphere, for it was not subdivided into cells and had no real center. That is, Nothing was not composed of other elements smaller than itself because it was the only existing element. Furthermore, Nothing had no real center, because a center is a starting point, and Nothing was the only existing element.

Also, this element Nothing was not a universal space, because it had within itself no other element, not even a void. The positive and negative results of the above equation are simply the values forming Nothing and do not correspond to forces or opposing charges; therefore, Nothing did not have definite positive and negative poles. In this way, Nothing was rather a spherical solid, but it was not a sphere because every sphere needs cells, i.e., smaller elements that compose it. Nor was it the universe, for it had no other element or reference within it. Nothing was therefore time in its still-antagonistic form.

Second Absolute Truth

As stated previously, Nothing was a spherical point. However, it is necessary to ask the following question: assuming that Nothing was a point, would this point have delimited the existence of another area in which it was placed?

The answer is that this is not possible, since Nothing was a single element, it could not have been placed anywhere else. In any case, if we assume that any existing element must have a shape, then the geometric form of Nothing that fits its characteristic as a single substance would really be a spherical point, because a sphere is the only geometric figure that is completely symmetrical up to its edges if we consider a central imaginary point.

It is therefore necessary to ask whether it is possible to consider the existence of a center or edges (extremities) during Tempus Antagonicus, since such factors did not exist in that era.

The answer that arises to this question is undoubtedly of the highest importance within the Theory of Objectivity. I propose that the answer is that Nothing had no center in the sense defined in this theory, for in this theory, every element in the universe has a real and measurable center determined by its sub-elements. Thus, the initial antagonistic point was a unique element and could not have been composed of other sub-elements. It is also considered that, unlike in conventional human mathematics, an element cannot have zero as its center. In this way, Nothing did NOT have a real center contained within its body, but it did have extremities as well as a real and superficially verifiable center, that is, a center that did not occur within itself, but only on its external surface, as will be demonstrated.

It is necessary to consider Nothing to have had extremities for the following reason: Nothing is described as a spherical point in this theory, because it is considered to have been an element rather than the absence of any element.

Considering Nothing to have been infinite would be defining it as a non-element, for it is not possible for an infinite element to exist. Saying that an element is infinite would be admitting non-existence, or the absence of any element. Antagonistic time thus had to have extremities, since they are necessary conditions for the existence of an element. What Nothing did not possess was a logical size, because size presupposes reference, and there was no other element in that era to serve as a reference for this spherical point. Thus, in the Era of Nothing, there was no size reference, so this spherical point could be thought of as the size of an atom or the size of a galaxy. Of course, everything would be the same either way, since there was no element beyond the antagonistic point itself, either inside or outside itself. There was no reference. The size of Nothing only gained meaning upon the formation of the universe.

However, a matter of the highest importance in terms of mathematical logic is related to this initial point of existence. The fact is, as mentioned previously, that infinity is not an element. Infinity means, therefore, the absence of any element. Thus, assuming Nothing to have been a spherical point with extremities, those extremities would have bordered on that infinite non-element. If it were not so, Nothing would have been confused with the infinite itself, with the absence of any element, and, therefore, would also have been a total absence of elements. Therefore, one of the absolute truths discussed in detail herein was already present at that initial moment. This truth means that, since Nothing was an autonomous element, there must have been at its extremities a field separating it from the infinite; otherwise, its existence would have been illogical, it would have become infinite, and, therefore, it would not have existed.

Hypothetically, Nothing could have been a spherical point with edges like a mirror, for beyond that limit there would be no element and everything would reflect into itself. However, I do not consider there to have been a mirror effect on the extremities of Nothing, for in order for this mirror effect to have existed, there would have to have been within this massive point an element capable of being reflected into itself. Furthermore, a mirror effect would require the presence of light. 

However, there was no such thing as magnetism or light in Nothing.

Thus, Nothing must have been a spherical point not only because of the existential equation, but also because the first absolute truth says that it existed. Nothing was spherical also because there is another absolute truth beyond the first that tells us that every element existing in the universe has a magnetic field, an aura separating it from the other existing elements and from the universe itself. In antagonistic time, this magnetic field would have separated Nothing from the infinite non-element.

It is therefore necessary to demonstrate the second absolute truth, in spite of its detailed foundation having been presented posteriori. This absolute truth should be presented immediately because it is a logical mathematical condition without which Nothing would have had no autonomous existence. Indeed, without this absolute truth, the antagonistic spherical point would have been confused with the infinite itself, and the infinite, as stated herein, is an absence of any element.

The second absolute truth tells us the following:

Every element existing in the universe has a magnetic field, an aura giving it unique existence and separating it from the other existing elements and from the universe itself.

The second absolute truth considers the existence of a universe. However, this absolute truth was already present in the Era of Nothing, even though, of course, the existential universe had not yet been formed, but only antagonistic time existed, a non-existential and still antagonistic universal form.

The foundation of this second absolute truth will be discussed in detail. However, the reason for using an absolute truth that indicates the existence of a universe to define an era in which the existential universe had not yet been formed should immediately be justified. First of all, the absolute truths that underlie this theory were already present during the antagonistic Era of Nothing, and in truth they give logical support to everything that is said about this contradictory time. However, whenever an absolute truth is conceptualized herein, the formation of a universe will be considered. This characteristic does not detract from the validity of the uses of these absolute truths in the foundation of Tempus Antagonicus, as will be demonstrated herein. The absolute truths that allowed the formation of the existential universe are the same truths that allowed the formation of all other elements existing within this universe. Nothing is the element from which all other things were derived. In this way, the absolute truths seen in terms of this significant element of non-existence also apply to every element forming after the universe came into existence, for everything is its derivation. It is also justified to use the already-formed universe to conceptualize a truth forming that very universe because Nothing, when it ceased to occur as the absence of existence, in fact did not disappear, but instead was contained and became a fundamental part of this formed universe. Another logical point to consider is that existence only arose upon the formation of the universe, since the preceding time was antagonistic. In this way, it is logical to consider that everything that exists is contained within the existential universe, even the rational concepts used to substantiate an occurrence prior to existence itself. In truth, the expansive antagonistic time was a kind of universe still contradictory and, therefore, still non-existent. The expansion that occurs beyond the existing universe is not within the contained universe, but it is its derivation and therefore also belongs to itself. Thus, even when a new universe is formed, the present universe will not disappear, but, like the antagonistic Nothing, it will be contained at the center of the resulting universe. In geometric logic, it will be demonstrated here that the existing universe was created from Nothing and the spherical point representative of Nothing happens to belong to this universe. With this occurrence, Nothing ceased to be antagonistic and instead became logical.

What is intended now is to conceptualize logically, clearly, and without contradictions, the meaning of Nothing. Human reason indicates that if Nothing had not existed as an initial autonomous element, the universe would not have had a starting point to initiate its formation, so no element would exist.

Regarding Nothing, there is a derived and logical truth derivative from the first absolute truth, which precisely tells the concept of Nothing:

The Nothing that was present prior to the existing universe was an autonomous element represented by a spherical point and its essence was mathematics.

In spite of the apparent flagrant contradiction between Nothing and existence, the objective of this work is to identify elements explaining how everything started from Nothing.

[…] By admitting that before existence Nothing necessarily occurred, we are faced with an initially illogical time. This contradictory, antagonistic time, will now be discussed speculatively, in order to produce the necessary logical conclusions subsequently.

Tempus Antagonicus

An initial hypothesis of the Theory of Objectivity is that before time became countable in the existential universe, there was a primitive time, which is herein called antagonistic time or Tempus Antagonicus. Thus, it can be referred to as time zero because in this era of eternity there was neither space nor any form of existence. Tempus Antagonicus would truly be Nothing. However, Nothing has a meaning. This substance of Nothing indicates that Tempus Antagonicus was a time without reference, because there was no existence, no universe, and nothing different from itself, and therefore it was time zero. That is the same as saying that before existence, there was Nothing. Time was zero because it had no reference point. So, in this way, time zero, Nothing, was truly antagonistic and contradictory, since although it must have occurred according to the first logical truth, it cannot be considered to have existed. Universal existence presupposes that there was a formed space containing an initial reference, a first element.

[…] Hypothetically, if Nothing in its era was an element of autonomous existence that increased in size in a continuous and constant form, this size would not make sense, for there was not at that moment anything beyond Nothing to serve as a reference. That is, it would be equivalent to say that Nothing, in its era, was the size of an atom or the size of a galaxy. In both cases, everything would be the same, since there was no reference element. Hence, Nothing would really have been antagonistic, since it was an element without reference, and in fact there was no element other than itself. Similarly, Nothing also hypothetically ceased to be antagonistic upon gaining a reference when the first unit of existence occurred. That first reference allowed Nothing to stop being contradictory, to stop being antagonistic, and to start composing its own existence.

[…] In spite of its apparent contradiction, it is necessary to define precisely what this Nothing was. According to the Theory of Objectivity, antagonistic time ended when universal existential time began, at the beginning of existence. This moment is considered to have occurred when something arose, namely, α, the first unit of existence. It is assumed in this theory that the emergence of α, which will be discussed later, began the count of existential time. In this theory, the count of time refers to the spatial dynamics. Tempus Antagonicus transformed itself from Nothing into something, for when α arose, it served as an initial reference mark, and primitive time lost its antagonistic characteristic. The appearance of α also marked the emergence of space, a universe, and within it a reference. If this hypothesis is considered to be true, there would be no contradiction, no antagonism, since Nothing would have gained its reference. At that point, that difference between something the size of an atom and something the size of a galaxy would have begun to make sense. When α arose, Nothing disappeared, and immediately there arose a space that had something as a reference. At this moment, Nothing ceased to be element without meaning, without dimension, without reference. When α arose, time stopped being zero and became countable.

[…] As mentioned previously, time is added every moment, and everything that has been added can be subtracted to reach zero. From this concept, a truth arises. This resulting truth lies in the fact that time is something that had a beginning, a zero mark, which it did because it cannot be said that time existed during the Era of Nothing. During that era, time was antagonistic, as already mentioned, precisely because it expanded only antagonistically: it was not countable, since time is equivalent to space and during the Era of Nothing there was no space. What existed during that era was only an expansive spherical contradictory point in search of a true condition. That is where a universal derivative truth comes from. This derivative truth leads us just to the beginning of everything, which occurred at the moment at which α arose along with the universe, beginning the count of time. At the zero instant of the formed universe, no unit of matter had yet been composed. Therefore, the smallest unit of time was determined by the rate at which the plasma filaments and memory units were formed. The application of this logical speed to the formation of the elements that composed the plasma, and consequently the memory units, will be discussed herein in a grounded manner, because in fact it forms an essential part of this theory.

[…] When everything came into existence, that is to say, when time ceased to be zero and became countable, Nothing ceased to be a single autonomous element. Nothing lost its autonomy when the universe first arose from itself, together with the first memory unit. Nothing was absorbed by its own creation and remains at the center of the universe as a logical spherical point, without its first contradiction.

Nothing, in contradictory time, had the form of a perfect spherical point that initially occurred autonomously and antagonistically. This fact is also proven by the existential equation yielding two virtual values of -2 and +2. Evidently these values occur because they represent the conditions imposed by the essence that makes up Nothing itself: mathematical logic. These numbers deal with absolute values and form all possible dimensions. Thus, each of the unit values yielded by the equation corresponds to a quadrant, with values of -1 and +1. The only geometric figure that accurately portrays these values is a perfect spherical point, as shown in Figure 9.

The antagonism of Nothing lies in the fact that its faces bordered the infinite, but infinite means non-element, total non-existence. This characteristic is a part of the antagonism. The other evidence of antagonism is the fact that this unity, Nothing, did not yet have a reference, another unit that could be said to exist.

Nothing did not lose its antagonism until the universal sphere was completed. Therefore, during the expansion of antagonistic time, the inductive effect did not yet have a universal space, for it was in fact the inductive effect that would form this space, the total mass sphere. Thus, it is necessary to present a derivative truth that arises:

During the expansion of antagonistic time, the inductive effect did not have a universal space, because this space was in fact created due to the action of this effect.

The expansion of antagonistic time from each of the faces of Nothing caused this era to lose its contradictory quality upon gaining a reference and ceasing to border infinity. This expansion of the faces of the antagonistic Nothing formed the universal plasma, which was complete when the total sphere was fully formed. That plasma is what composes space, because there is no empty space within the universe. That is to say, the universe is a sphere composed of space, and this space contains a formative substance, namely, plasma filaments. There can be no empty space within existence.

The expansion of the antagonistic point gave rise to filaments of four types. These filaments of opposing geometric patterns were actually components of the plasma that formed the universe. The center of the newly formed universe, the embryonic memory, is not located in the same sense as in conventional mathematical coordinates, as can be seen in Figure 9, which depicts the expansion of the spherical point. The existence of the universe is only possible because it was created with an exact geometric form, and everything that can be said about the existence of the universe necessarily results from geometric elements derived from that first form, which was a spherical point.

Here the word expansion is not intended to refer strictly to expansion, but rather to arising. Expansion in the strict sense would mean entering another space, and there was no space outside the antagonistic Nothing. Thus, there was a true development of the plasma filaments from the spherical point representative of Nothing.

The Theory of Objectivity is intended to prove that the plasma energy making up the universe arose initially from four patterns of filaments derived from each of the faces of the antagonistic point. These filaments make up the universal plasma, which is the substance that forms space.