Nothing

In the context of this alternate timeline, the very concept of "nothing" is strikingly different from how it is understood in our reality. Rather than being a clearly defined state of non-existence or absence, "nothing" is viewed in a much more ambiguous, abstract manner across scientific, philosophical and religious domains.

The Ambiguity of Nothingness

Within the scientific community of this timeline, there is no broadly accepted theory or model that describes the properties and behavior of "empty space" or a "void." Physicists have not developed equations and frameworks, such as quantum field theory, that posit the existence of a fundamental nothingness underlying the universe. Instead, space and the cosmos are typically described in more relative terms - as areas of lower density, lesser activity, or greater unknown, rather than true nothingness.

Similarly, in philosophy, the notion of "nothing" as a distinct state or entity is not a central focus of debate. Thinkers grapple more with the nature of existence, non-existence, and the limits of human knowledge, without converging on a clear definition of nothing. Discussions often focus on the absence or lack of specific things, rather than contemplating the idea of pure nothingness.

Spiritual Perspectives on Non-Existence

The major religions and spiritual belief systems in this timeline also do not have the same well-developed concepts of a state of absolute non-existence or void. While they may speak of realms or dimensions devoid of physical matter and energy, these are still imbued with some form of abstract essence, consciousness or potential. The idea of a true metaphysical "nothing" is largely absent.

For example, in the predominant Dharmism faith, the ultimate state of liberation (moksha) is not characterized as a complete annihilation of the self, but rather a transcendence of individual identity and a merging with the undifferentiated universal life-force. Similarly, Abrahamic faiths focus more on the nature of the divine creative force that brought the world into being, rather than speculating about the qualities of pre-creation "nothingness."

Linguistic Challenges

The very language used in this timeline presents obstacles to clearly defining and conveying the idea of "nothing." Most major languages do not have a single, unambiguous term that directly translates to the English word. The closest equivalents tend to be words suggesting absence, lack, or non-existence of specific things, rather than a universal state of pure nothingness.

This linguistic limitation shapes how people in this timeline conceptualize and discuss the unknown, the unobservable, and the boundaries of reality. Articulating the nature of the void, the pre-Big Bang state, or the radical absence of all phenomena proves challenging within the available linguistic frameworks.

Implications and Perspectives

The lack of a clear, widely-accepted concept of "nothing" in this timeline has profound implications for how its inhabitants view the universe, the origins of existence, and the limits of human knowledge. Without a defined notion of a primordial void or all-encompassing nothingness, the very idea of "creation from nothing" is foreign. Cosmological models tend to focus more on the transformation and rearrangement of pre-existing materials and energies.

Similarly, the philosophical and spiritual perspectives in this timeline lean more towards cyclical or continuous views of existence, rather than a linear progression from nothingness to being. The unknown and the unobservable are seen less as a void to be filled, and more as realms of untapped potential and higher planes of reality.

Ultimately, the lack of a clear "nothing" concept shapes a worldview that is more comfortable with ambiguity, uncertainty, and the limits of human understanding. While the specifics may differ, this timeline's inhabitants grapple with the mysteries of existence in ways that are distinct from the predominant perspectives in our own reality.