A Theory on the Start of the Universe

OK, so I've concocted an idea on how the universe, and more generally reality, could've began. The seeds of this theory were sown when I was thinking about how reality seems so inaccessible to the mind (the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, failure of hidden variable theories, omnipresent uncertainty in measurements [measurements must obviously be a finite process and thus can never capture in entirety irrational "real" properties], and I'm sure there's more). But then I thought, what if we swap them? What if reality is caused by the mind? Now, this is pretty similar to an idea I've had before ([1]), but I've fleshed it out now. Consider the idea of nothingness. If there existed from concept of true "nothingness", then the existence of the term "nothingness" to describe it implies that there is something, the term previously mentioned. For a simpler example, think of something that can't be thought. Impossible, no? Thus the "can't be thought"/nothingness can't exist as, based on our premise, reality follows from thought. Now you may ask, what is doing the thinking? The answer is fairly simple, by asking that and expecting an answer, you assume there to be intelligence. Thus my argument follows. Thus logic exists. Now we get a little more shaky. First, we assume that logic ⇔* free-will ⇔ particles as the right to left direction has been shown/can be shown easily, but the left to right only follows as it there seem to exist little else that imply so. Reality following from mind would also imply this. Thus if logic exists, so does free-will, and so do particles. Thus the universe exists.

I do have a proposition for how the failures of reality can be resolved, and that is if we can axiomatize physics into a formal system (i.e. have it follow from the mind), then by Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem there must be unprovable statements in the formal system. Thus the failures of reality like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle could be those statements. However, clearly our reality measurements must be approaching something, suggesting these statements to have some answer (or value of the limit). Thus suggests these "unprovable" statements have some value assigned to them. Thus there seems to be something else at play here. If we stick with the standard Laws of Thought, then the principle of explosion would make reality be only contradictions, something that is clearly false upon existence. So I propose that there is another logical system here, like fuzzy logic, or there is some sort of "principle of minimal radius" or something like that limiting the ability of the principle of explosion. I am not sure what that could be though, the POE is very convincing of an argument, but maybe it could be multiple logical systems simultaneously, and each isolates the POE from each other? I'm not sure

Now, personally I am impartial to this theory. The last implications seem very dubious to me, furthermore, I'm not convinced that reality follows from the mind, as it seems to suggest some sort of "maximum" mind that reality is following from. I still don't really have any firm belief to any epistemological theory on the beginning of reality, so any theories would be appreciated (send to Guestbook). Also, the failures of logic listed in [2] make logic's implication of the universe rather sus. Also, a quick update: I think I'm just going to give up on whatever train of thought I had for the aging post as I can't seem to recall it anymore; I do have another series of posts in planning though.

• ⇔ means bijection, i.e. if and only if, i.e. p→q and q→p where p, q are statements and → means an implication.

[1] https://listed.to/@vt/33768/free-will
[2] https://listed.to/@vt/34211/logical-limits