the beginning and the end
Short preliminary remark
If I just started with my thoughts, there would be a certain danger of someone shouting: “Hey, that’s not scientific!” Two preliminary remarks are therefore permitted.
All our thinking is based on previously thought and mostly we deal with premises. Such as A $100 bill has a material value of c. 50 cents. However, you and I, John and Mary, and the tax collector have worked out that this bill has a purchasing power of $100 and so we have a great model. If we can no longer agree on this, our system will collapse. It is, therefore, like many others, a systemically important premise to say so. 
Science, above all physics, explains our universe to us with the big bang and the infinite expansion that followed. To take corrective action again: limited infinity. Physics and its sister mathematics can only work with defined premises.
As we now know, quantum physics has proved many aspects that were previously considered unscientific, most notably Buddhist/Zen Buddhist and Daoist ideas. I emphasize this because it is these areas that shape my understanding of being. In particular, of course, the intellectual superstructure of my metaverse. 
The explanations of physics have always been unsatisfactory for me.  Did it all start with the Big Bang? But what was before that? I am serious. Expansion into (limited!) infinity? What’s behind it? Just to touch on 2 questions.
Saying this I have to make some limitations for my project first. The epicenter of the beginning of everything would have to be set before the Big Bang, but let’s content ourselves for the time being with this part of the emergence, which was initially characterized by chaos. My second example today then shows the provisional peripheral area of the metaverse.
myths about the origin of the world
I did a few works on that and chose this one to show. According to various myths of Western and especially Far Eastern mythology, the universe was created by a dragon. ( some good thoughts @ Reddit ).
My first picture now deals with this dragon/chaos concept. You can perhaps object: “Ok, I see the chaos, but where is the dragon?” As already mentioned, I am less and less concerned with representing concrete objects but more with principles, and thoughts, briefly playing with the philosophical part of being. (With a bit of imagination, the head of the dragon can be seen at the top left, below the elongated body and its wings. But it’s all about the dragon “feeling” and most of it the point where chaos and creator are still largely one).
The 2nd work deals with the other end of the spectrum, both spatially and philosophically – a very difficult task. I titled it: “A couple of miles before the end of time“. Until then I can go (for now).
I like the idea, the title, and the resulting questions. Does the metaverse come to an end with the end of time? Or is there something greater than what can be measured with chronometers? If matter no longer exists, can there still be time, or is time a property that can only exist in connection with matter? Timekeeping is another chapter and the comparison with the $100 bill comes to mind. 
At first, I was tempted to paint a more diffuse picture, a blurry galaxy, but upon further reflection came to this solution.
So this is the area where physics (measurable/quantifiable) and philosophy (metaphysics) meet.
Why did I choose this type of representation? The far biggest part of the picture is emptiness. With this representation, there is nothing more concrete to cling to (in the Buddhist sense of detachment). What remains is a force field that acts inward but at the same time points far into the distance (yin::yang).
We are still in the vast area of the epicenter, but already a few light years further in time and space 😊. The chaos is beginning to be organized, and material and light are beginning to separate and demarcate, allowing a glimpse into the distance. The spherical is born.
A painter who influenced me greatly in my early days was Oskar Kokoschka, a great artist, and teacher. (He was born just 15km from the town where I grew up). One of his most remarkable sentences is: “The most difficult thing in painting is omitting“.
Years later I turned to Chinese painting, in which omission also plays a major role, I have thought a lot about this sentence for many years.  And thinking one step further, the question is in the room for me: How much more has to remain in a painting so that it is still art?
I have already presented some of these works before, such as these two. The one on the right consists of exactly 2 lines – and yet it “tells a story”. (Try to tell a story with 2 strokes).
For me personally, the bar is set at this point: tells a story – tells no story.
Until these questions above are resolved, I maintain the working hypothesis that these last miles before the end of time are the meeting place of physics and philosophy.
 In the discussion about cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, the aspect of energy consumption has been taking up a lot of space for some time. Many of us would be surprised if they knew how much energy resources are consumed with our FIAT money management.
 Of course, I would never presume to question science, especially since I enjoyed a scientific education. I’m not an esoteric either – and I’ve been vaccinated against Covid-19 3 times 🙂
 One of the many good articles on the subject of quantum physics/Buddhist concepts is THIS because it’s also easier to understand.
 One of our paradoxes: there is a plethora of fake money in our circulation. A fake banknote has the same purchasing power as a real one. A very insightful article on this HERE
 Some of the posts in which I deal with these aspects in more detail can be found at: art theory