How does Cosmogony differ from The Evolutioning of Creation from Nothingness?

Cosmogony is a term that encompasses any kind of study into the creation or origin of the universe or cosmos; i.e. the coming into a reality of existence in SpaceTime. Whereas the "Evolution of Creation from Nothingness," referring to the collective works of 'The Evolutioning of Creation' volumes 1 and 2, deals with a specific approach to the creation of our reality in existence.

Although volume 1 of these works starts out as an existential purview of creation, I particulary like the author's approach to marrying the philosophical considerations of creation with the more comological sense of our relativity within Space and Time. It is one of the first studies that relegates that openly expresses a model for the Open Universe Theory in which the reality of our universe will forever accelerate. The author first presents this alternative view of cosmogony as a model in which the universe understood a state of nothingness prior to the convergence of Space and Time. He then bound our reality of existence in degrees of SpaceTime convergences through which the universe is persists as the natural evolutionary progression of Space in Time.

In volume 2, the author re-evaluates the quality of nothingness in the full color presentation of his uniquely fascinating paradigm for this evolutionary progression. I like his quip about creation in which he states that it appears you can get "something from nothing" after all.