Idealism vs Materialism.

In the last half century, science has made some bizarre discoveries that has left many rethinking what we know about our existence. Virtually all physicists accept the big bang as irrefutable. An incomprehensible sized explosion that took place hundreds of billions of years ago which began all existence, but that left some scientists wondering, what was there before the explosion? Does this mean that everything came from nothing? How could that be? The materialist concept of reality claims that all life is a byproduct of matter, and since all matter is energy and energy can't be created or destroyed, then how could everything have come from nothing? The big bang theory does not fit into the materialist view of existence. Einstein spent thirty years trying to disprove the theory of nonlocality that his rival Niels Bohr was proposing. Nonlocality basically claims that everything in existence influences every other thing that exists, but materialism states that for an object to be influenced by another object, they would have to be in close proximity. Just before Einstein died, he conceded that he could not find a way to disprove nonlocality. . http://www.timeone.ca...http://www.nature.com...If you take a piece of plywood and cut two square holes in it side by side and faced it at the wall, then shot at the holes with a sand blaster, what would happen? If you live in an apartment, you're probably gonna lose your security deposit because you'll have two square spots sand blasted into your wall. If you aimed a flashlight at the holes, you'd get an interference pattern on your wall. Since electrons are matter, they should behave like the sand and make two spots on the wall, but for some reason they don't, it makes an interference pattern like the light does. That doesn't make any sense, electrons don't even move like light waves. When scientists went to figure out which electrons were going through which holes, the pattern changed to the way they expected initially. Did that mean the electrons knew when they were being observed? When the scientists tried to observe the electrons after they went through the holes, but before they hit the wall, they realized that not only did it change the pattern of the electrons, but it effected how the electrons behaved in the past. Does this mean the scientists were infuencing the past? Non of this phenomenon fits in with what we know about time and how matter travels. Non of this fits in with the materialist point of view. . https://en.m.wikipedia.org...http://physicsworld.com...https://en.m.wikipedia.org...https://en.m.wikipedia.org...When Dr James Gates told Neil DeGrasse Tyson that the tiniest particals that make up the universe were actually made up of bits, like in a computer, Neil Degrasse Tyson almost had a mental breakdown. It only got worse when Dr Gates revealed that those bits were made up of one and zeroes, and the code being used is a type of computer code that was invented in the fortees and is still used today. Are we actually in a complex simulation program? This certainly doesn't fit into the materialist view of the universe. . http://www.space.com...Holographic principle basically claims that our three dimensional perception of the universe is being projected onto our minds from a two dimensional plane, as if our entire life is a cartoon. . https://www.google.com...All we have to gather information about our universe, our world, our existence, is our senses, but our senses are only suited for us. Our senses may be useless when it comes to other aspects of our universe. Other dimensions, other systems of time and distance that we cannot even begin to comprehend because our senses don't allow us to. If you were born blind, and nobody ever told you that sight existed, you would go on with life only depending on the other senses you have and you wouldn't know otherwise, but what if you somehow gained your sense of sight latter on in life. It would be very dramatic to gain an extra sense that you never knew existed. It would be jarring to realize that you could now have a visual display of your world around you, and you didn't even know that your world could be seen. The concept of sight would have been incomprehensible to you if nobody ever told you about it. Perhaps there are other senses that humans lack, which would give us a comprehension of our existence that we don't realize exists, a different perspective of our dimension. Materialism claims that our life, the universe, and every phenomena within, is all the by-product of matter. The idealist view is, our existence is based entirely off our senses. Think about it, everything you know or have ever done, every feeling you've ever had, every bit of information you've encountered in your life required your brain to process information from your senses. Your entire existence is based on your senses. In lew of some interesting or even unnerving discoveries in the field of physics, one can only conclude that the materialist point of view is either flawed and need revisions, or is obsolete altogether.