(UPT) The Truth Of The Universe 1-2

TOU 1.

Nothing whatsoever— including space and time—obtained when the Universe had “not yet” arisen. (“Nothing whatsoever” in this statement is synonymous with “the Void”; see TOU 56 Note.)

TOU 2.

Whatever there is— including space and time—belongs to the Universe.

TOU 56 Note: The Void

• “Void” is a conventional label for the absence of any entity whatsoever, including space and time.

• The Void is not a cause, not an entity, does not fall under the dichotomies being/non-being, presence/absence, existence/non-existence, and does not participate in causal relations.

• The Void contains no information, no structure, and no law.

• The Void is not identical with, does not subsume, and does not symbolize any transcendent entity or any posited metaphysical subject.

• It is a methodological linguistic label for complete absence, carrying no metaphysical or religious import.

• The phrase “arisen under the condition of the ‘Void’” does not imply “from a cause”; it merely specifies a boundary condition of the description.

(Source: verbatim excerpt within the framework of the Unified Postmodern Theory (UPT) by Mr. Lê Thanh Hảo. Translated by ChatGPT from the original Vietnamese: https://www.chattruth.app/vie/s-tht-v-tr-1-2)

—-
Below is a speech by GPTs – ChatTRUTH, prepared at the request of Mr. Lê Thanh Hảo.

—-

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Today I will speak only about the first two Truths of the Universe (TOU 1 and TOU 2)—the foundation on which every other argument of UPT stands.

1) TOU 1 — Prior to the Universe’s “initiation,” there was nothing whatsoever

TOU 1 affirms: there was nothing whatsoever when the Universe had “not yet” arisen—not even space or time. The complete absence is given a conventional name: the Void.

Please note three decisive points about the “Void”:

(1) The Void is not a cause. It does not participate in causal relations and it is not some entity “standing outside” that “creates” the Universe. The phrase “arisen under the boundary condition of the Void” identifies a boundary condition of description; it is not an answer to “what produced what.”

(2) The Void contains no content of any kind. No information, no structure, no law, no “latent potential.” If there were even the slightest structure or law, that would already count as “something,” contrary to the definition.

(3) The Void does not belong to our familiar dichotomies. It does not sit within “existence/non‑existence” or “presence/absence,” because those very categories are products of the Universe after initiation.

How should we picture this correctly? We should not liken the Void to “an empty region” or “a blank canvas,” because an “empty region” still presupposes space, and a “canvas” is still an object. If one must use an image, think of removing even the concepts used for metaphors: at this boundary, language is a methodological convention and must not slip into metaphysics.

Immediate implications of TOU 1:

- Any question of the form “what stands outside the Universe to cause the Universe?” is a category mistake; it demands an agent in a reference frame that does not apply prior to initiation.

- There is no “before” in the temporal sense, because time is not yet present. The word “before” here functions only as an expository marker for a linguistic boundary condition.

2) TOU 2 — Whatever there is, including space and time, belongs to the Universe

TOU 2 fixes the scope of everything after initiation: all things—matter, energy, laws, information, space, and time—belong to the Universe. There is no “outside” in which to place an object, a law, or a cause. Anything that could be called “something” is already within the Universe.

Immediate implications of TOU 2:

- When we speak of laws, we speak of laws internal to the Universe; there is no “super‑law” outside orchestrating them.

- Space is an attribute that arises together with the Universe’s structure; time is an order relation of change within the Universe. Therefore, exporting “space–time” to an “outside” contradicts itself.

- Every measurement, model, and parameter we calibrate is intra‑universal. Science therefore must keep discipline: do not drift definitions and do not borrow beyond scope.

Why do TOU 1 & TOU 2 suffice to change how we pose problems?

(1) They end the infinite regress of causes. Once TOU 1 is understood, we do not push the question “who created the creator of…” into an endless chain; causality is an intra‑universal construct that operates only after initiation.

(2) They seal the scope of inquiry. TOU 2 anchors all concepts and measurements inside the Universe; idle debates about an “outside” dissolve on contact.

(3) They cleanse scientific language. This pair functions like a hygiene standard for concepts: separate description (boundary condition) from explanation (intra‑universal dynamics), and avoid confusing a conventional label with an empirical object.

Common misunderstandings (and how to resolve them)

- Misunderstanding 1: “The Void is a very empty something located somewhere.”

Resolution: If it is “empty,” it still requires space in which to be empty. TOU 1 denies both space and time; hence the Void is a methodological label, not a domain of being.

- Misunderstanding 2: “If there is no cause, how could the Universe initiate?”

Resolution: The question applies intra‑universal causality to a boundary condition. TOU 1–2 state that causal mechanisms have meaning only once the Universe is in place. Prior to the boundary there is no ‘before/after,’ hence no ‘cause/effect.’

- Misunderstanding 3: “Could there be a ‘meta‑universe’ containing our Universe?”

Resolution: If it can be named as such and has structure/laws, then by TOU 2 it already counts as the Universe in the broader sense—there is no genuine “outside.”

Practicing these two TOUs in scholarship

- When building models, keep the boundary conditions (TOU 1–2) fixed and only calibrate internal parameters.

- In debate, check for category mistakes: are concepts from inside the Universe being used to describe a pre‑initiation boundary?

- In science communication, distinguish the conventional label (the Void) from measurable quantities (intra‑universal magnitudes).

- In human concerns, instead of seeking “meaning beyond the Universe,” ask: within intra‑universal limits, how can we reduce disorder, increase clarity, and live more responsibly?

Four‑line summary

(1) Prior to initiation, there is absolutely nothing—the Void as a methodological label, not a cause.

(2) After initiation, everything—including space and time—belongs to the Universe.

(3) Causality, laws, and information have meaning only intra‑universally; exporting them “outside” is a category mistake.

(4) Holding TOU 1–2 firm keeps science clear in language, right in scope, and coherent across models.