If our universe exist, then what doesn't exist?

This has been bothering me for awhile now I've been thinking a lot and the basic law of everything is that both sides of an equation must be balanced. So imagine that our universe is one side of the equation I've always wondered what is the other side of the equation. Now my theory is that on the other side of the equation there is a completely opposite and inverse version of our universe that cannot exist I'll refer to it as the antiuniverse. Confusing right? I'll try to explain. The basic thought process is that if our universe exist the antiuniverse has the exist as the nonexistent opposite of our universe. This means that it does not exist but it is still present so it can "balance the equation". Still confusing? I'll explain some of the antiuniverse's concepts to help you understand.

Universe Vs Antiuniverse

#1 Since our universe takes up a positive amount of volume, the antiuniverse takes up a negative amount of volume (which helps you understand why it does not exist.)

#2 The laws of our universe do not apply to the antiuniverse meaning that even first law of thermodynamics *Matter cannot be created nor destroyed* doesn't apply but the opposite effect, that in the antiuniverse can create and destroy matter. This will apply to all other laws.

#3 As our universe expands the antiuniverse shrinks. So that means before the Big Bang when matter in our universe was at a very condensed primordial state the antiuniverse was closer towards having a nonnegative volume.

There are more concepts but these 3 are the easiest to explain.

I also have a few hypothesis for why the concept of an antiuniverse might be true. No science exist today can explain where matter came from and whether it was created or it has always been here. The Antiuniverse can ALMOST explain the Origins of matter and our universe. Referring back to the first law of thermodynamics and how its flipped in the antiuniverse, if matter can be created or destroyed in the antiuniverse then maybe all if the matter in our universe can be traced back to the antiuniverse. (In reference to balancing equations) If the antiuniverse somehow created matter then equally it would have had to destroy matter in order to maintain balance, but since there was no matter to destroy in the first place the created matter and the *nonexistent* destroyed matter separated and made our universe and the antiuniverse. This kind of explains why the antiuniverse is real but doesn't exist, This also explains why the antiuniverse takes up a negative amount of space.

I want to elaborate but I can go on about this for hours, basically does anyone agree or disagree with my statements? I would like some feedback to further understand this.

Why is this in Septagon?

dustin pls go

This has been bothering me for awhile now I've been thinking a lot and the basic law of everything is that both sides of an equation must be balanced.

Not when there aren't any laws.

What if laws are only tied to their universe? What if there aren't any laws before a universe? Then you can do what you want with energy, if it can even be defined.

That's true if it did exist, any could be possible because we have no idea what the opposite is

Science rules!

What an uninteresting question.

If our universe exist, then what doesn't exist?

God.

If our universe exist, then what doesn't exist?

God.

That's neither confirmable nor deniable.

You mean dark matter?

Your basic premise (this idea that everything has to be "balanced") just has no root in fact, at all. The entire universe, everything we know, simply started as a ridiculously dense ball of matter. Nothing was created, it just overflowed with pressure. That doesn't mean it has to have some opposite.

What an uninteresting question.

Philosophy, do you speak it?

Yes. Very, very strongly.

http://theleagueofreason.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=12331&p=163024

yawn

people don't think the universe be like it is, but it do.

Mirrors and eyes.

people don't think the universe be like it is, but it do.

thanks ed