The prevailing argument raised against Growing Earth theory and a growing universe invariably returns to the issue of the constancy of matter and the notion that it cannot come into being, or be created - simply out of nothing. The scientific community placed an emphasis on this issue when rejecting S Warren Carey's theory for Earth Expansion, nearly half a century ago, stating that there is no viable mechanism evident to science which allows for the creation of matter within the core of the Earth, causing it to expand. The common scientific perception of the substance of matter, when considering the atomic and sub-atomic construct from which it is comprised, puts into question, however, the viability of the term itself and whether such a thing as matter, as we've come to define and understand it, truly exists at all in our universe.

If what distinguishes the varying elements of matter from each other is primarily the unique atomic and molecular arrangements of the identically-structured atomic and sub-atomic particles - and if these atomic and sub-atomic particles are primarily defined by their electromagnetic fields and not by any material substance which they may or may not possess - and if we have yet to be able to conclusively define any material substance within the atomic and sub-atomic particles - which are primarily defined by their electromagnetic fields - well then, where, if anywhere, is this matter that we continue to research and explore the construct of in science?

Has any material substance ever been actually detected in the core of an electron? Or a proton? Positron? Neutrino? Prime-matter? How can there be any material substance there, if material substance is primarily defined by the more complex arrangement of complex configurations of these particles, as they bond together to become atoms and molecules?

More so, it appears that these sub-atomic particles are in fact nothing more than confined instances of energy, or force, which are differentiated by limitless combinations of positive and negative (for lack of better terms) electromagnetic (or other) forces - and the manner in which they bond, combine and interact with each other.

When we discuss the material content of an atom comparing to its electromagnetic field as being the proportion of a baseball to a sports stadium - what is it exactly at the core of an atom which can be defined as having any material substance? Are not the neutron and proton also primarily defined by their electromagnetic fields? And this being the case, is there anything conjectured to comprise any portion of prime matter particles, which we can assume has any substance other than more of the same energy or electromagnetic field configurations?

I dare say there can be no true material substance within atomic and sub-atomic particles, because material substance is the expression of a more comlex configuration of these particles - which, therefore, can only be defined as instances of energy or electromagnetic force. But if the atoms and sub-atomic particles which comprise what we term as substance matter, are solely and conclusively energy and force instances... well, then, it follows that the complex structures they comprise, are also solely and conclusively energy and force instances - and could not possess any true material substance, as we so commonly perceive.

Our material existence, therefore, is quite non-existent as such - scientifically speaking, of course. It is more a function of perception and terminology than it is a matter of substance. Our universe, planet and civilization are at best, comprised of complex formations of energy and force which have no true material substance at all. Our scientific thirst to learn about and define our environment, is primarily due to our perception as mind beings who also have no essential material substance to speak of, either.

I believe this notion should divert the focus from the creation of matter as being essential to Growing Earth theory. We should, perhaps, focus on the issue of the transformation of energy instance configuration, instead.

Growing Earth becomes far more feesible and acceptable when understood as such.