Argument Against an Infinite Past

[MindForgedManacle]

OK.

I am not calling empty space nothingness. I am calling what existed prior to the universe as nothingness - no fields, no particles, no gravity - nothing.

Well you see, the question of what existed 'prior' to the universe is, to put it mildly, controversial. More accurately, unknown at this point. However, most of (if not all) the proposals have something existing prior, be that a vacuum or something else entirely.

To illustrate. Matter and anti-matter collide - they eliminate each other completely. That resultant state is nothingness.

I don't think that's actually a correct way of looking at it. Virtual particle pairs neither come "from" nothing nor "return" to it.

The universe from nothing theory is essentially that process in reverse.

Which if true would make it inescapably inexplicable.

The argument as to whether we can refer to nothingness as existing is mute. In that we are making reference to the something that makes up the universe I think we can refer to the existence of nothingness - if nothing else to recognise the possible state where there is nothing.

It's not moot if it makes no sense. A 'state' of nothingness wouldn't be a state at all, but no thing at all. It's a nonsense concept I think.