A Rational Cosmology: The Universe Cannot Be Destroyed

The universe is existence. If the universe could be destroyed, then, someday, it would be possible for existence not to exist! Such an assertion stands in clear opposition to the irrefutable axiom of existence.

Let the reader recall from our discussion of the three fundamental axioms of existence, identity, and consciousness that the statement "Existence does not exist" is tantamount to saying, ""That which has the essential property of existing does not have the essential property of existing," or claiming that A does not equal A. (Note that the word "that" in the above phrase is not used to denote any single entity, but rather every entity that has the property of existing.)

It is conceivable, that, following the passage of a large amount of time, no entity that currently exists will remain in existence. The currently existing entities will, in that case, be transformed into some other entities. An entity, unlike the universe, must have a beginning and can have an end.

But the new entities that come about, whatever they are, will exist, and will comprise the universe. To say that the universe can end at time X is to say that all the entities that exist at time X will simultaneously not exist at time X, which is a blatant contradiction in terms.

The fact that the universe cannot be destroyed can be used to refute, once again, a whole host of theistic and empiricist-positivist theories, but the most prominent of these is the Big Crunch theory, a companion to the Big Bang theory, which proposes that, someday, the universe should shrink back to form the singularity that gave it rise.

Along with the self-evident contradiction involved in claiming that the universe can ever end, the Big Crunch theory errs in treating the universe as an entity, and, moreover, as a single entity in perpetuity. At the formation of separate entities from a singularity (itself impossible, as we have seen), these entities continue to behave in some coordinated fashion, as if they comprised one entity with a central means of controlling and directing its actions.

But, as already stated, the universe is not an entity; it is only the totality of all the distinct entities that exist. That which is not an entity cannot act in any way, for only entities can act. Expansion and contraction are actions inseparable from the entities performing them. Thus, not being an entity, the universe cannot expand or contract.

We cannot speak of the universe as doing or having anything qua universe. Even so-called universal attributes, such existence and identity, can be validly termed "universal" because they individually pertain to every entity. Existence is a quality that individual entities have; it is not the quality of some all-encompassing super-thing.

The Big Crunch theory, in its portrayal of the universe's collapse, may, in its milder incarnations, suggest that multiple entities (that comprise the present universe) will someday become a single homogeneous entity, a singularity, which will consequently comprise the entire universe.

However, a homogeneous entity is one that does not have parts that can function as entities themselves. Man, on the other hand, is a heterogeneous entity, as is even an atom composed of distinct protons, neutrons, and electrons. It is possible to aggregate multiple entities into one heterogeneous entity, but not into a homogeneous entity, such as a singularity.

The logic behind the impossibility of creating a homogeneous entity from multiple entities follows thus.

It is self-evident that the universe consists of many different entities with fundamentally different natures and qualities.

That which has been made as a combination of different entities must retain in itself some of the qualities and components contributed by the constituent entities in the making of the combined entity. These qualities could be mass or volume, for example, or they can be even more indicative of the original constituent entities, such as texture, or shape, or length. The components could be atoms, or protons, or large molecules, or even whole macroscopic stretches of an entity made from a given element, for instance.

Different entities have different qualities and different components, and will contribute different qualities and different components to the making of the aggregate entity.

Having different qualities and different components within an entity automatically prevents that entity from being homogeneous (i.e. being made of no distinct, separable components).

It is logically impossible for multiple entities that currently exist or could potentially exist to combine into a homogeneous "singularity." It has already been demonstrated that a singularity could not have been the beginning of the universe, nor can it be the universe's end. Moreover, it will be shown in further discussions that singularities cannot exist altogether.

Read other parts of "A Rational Cosmology" by clicking here.