For centuries, Leibniz’s ultimate question—why is there something rather than nothing?—has been approached either through the postulation of an uncaused creator or by equating “nothingness” with the highly regulated quantum vacuum of modern physics (as popularized by the Zero Energy Universe model). This article proposes a purely logical, meta-ontological solution that avoids both the infinite regress of a creator and the physicalist category error. By demonstrating that eternal stasis is not a default condition but an extreme constraint requiring an absolute prescriptive law (“nothing shall change”), the article establishes that in a state of absolute rulelessness, stillness is impossible. Polarization into a zero-sum expression (0 = +n−n) is not a physical event requiring a mechanism, but the descriptive tautology of a state completely devoid of bias. Thus, the article argues that existence is the only logically coherent, default condition of absolute zero. --- Version history: - v2 (May 2026): Added explicit defense of Premise 2 as the argument's substantive core (Section II). Minor clarifications. - v1 (May 2026): Initial preprint.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Markus Komulainen
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Markus Komulainen (Thu,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0171ce3a9f334c28271dd2 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20092786
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: