Poll: After I asked myself the biggest "Question" there is.
It shook my faith
It strengthened my faith or led me to it
It had no impact of my faith/lack of faith
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-02-2014, 09:28 AM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/d5d3dc850933

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-02-2014, 11:39 AM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
(16-02-2014 09:28 AM)bemore Wrote:  https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/d5d3dc850933

Certainly an interesting link. Do you see relevance between emergent time and the idea of something from nothing?

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-02-2014, 01:24 PM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
(15-02-2014 09:49 PM)toadaly Wrote:  We are limitted by such things. If 'nothing' is not consistent within the framework of the tools we have, then it isn't a concept at all. Talking about nothing, is literally and philosophically, not talking about anything, if it isn't consistent.

Of course, but "what we can understand" and "what can actually exist" need not be strictly overlapping sets.

(15-02-2014 09:49 PM)toadaly Wrote:  In regard to the axioms of logic, this is not obvious. They seem to be so fundamental, that not only do we never observe them being violated, but we can not even imagine it. It's *possible* that logic is only a human construct - some wierd quirk in our brain construction that makes all our experiences consistent, but if so, then attempting to talk about something that doens't fit in there, like 'nothing', still makes no sense.

I'm not disputing that we cannot conceptualise an entirely coherent definition of nothing.

But the old caveat always applies: we don't know what we don't know.

(15-02-2014 09:49 PM)toadaly Wrote:  In 'possible worlds' semantics, the minimum possible world, must neverthess include the axioms of logic.

Why?

(15-02-2014 09:49 PM)toadaly Wrote:  Because it's not anything, not even the axioms of logic. ...unless you qualify it to include them. But suppose you do. Ok now you have a 'possible world', that contains nothing except logic. You can't get from that to here, because even in that world, time does not exist, so to get from nothing to something, requires that something exist, which is still a contradiction.

Time is a characteristic of our universe. It is tied to the concept of observable transitions...

It needn't - for example - be in any way applicable to whatever (may have) existed prior to our universe.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-02-2014, 01:34 PM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
(16-02-2014 09:28 AM)bemore Wrote:  https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/d5d3dc850933

I could have sworn I'd seen that discussed here before...

Turns out I was right.
(if that's of any interest)

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
16-02-2014, 01:48 PM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
(15-02-2014 09:14 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  And Unicorns exist per Harry Potter.

The bible is proof that people know how to make up stories and write them down, then copy them, then make errors while copying and then making up new stuff they like and removing stuff they don't like.

Once you know how the book was put together, you won't see it as holy anymore. You'll see it for what it is. A book of stories

Nothing more

this is how it was put together.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorg.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-02-2014, 02:41 PM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
(13-02-2014 06:52 PM)natachan Wrote:  I got the answer from watching Star Trek. Oh gospel of Star Trek, you have yet to lead me astray.

Reference/episode?

Official ordained minister of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Please pm me with prayer requests to his noodly goodness. Remember, he boiled for your sins and loves you. Carbo Diem! RAmen.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-02-2014, 11:47 PM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
(16-02-2014 01:24 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Of course, but "what we can understand" and "what can actually exist" need not be strictly overlapping sets.

Nothign is not a somethign that could exist. It's the lack of existence of anything. We're not discussing whether unicorns might exist, but rather, the nonexistence of anything. Nothing, is *less*, rather than more. I'm not sure then whey we should not expect to fully understand whether it's possible.

At any rate, we are still stuck with what we can understand. If someone postulates a square circle, we need not take it seriously even though the argument might be made that our minds just can't imagine it. Well, sure they can't, because it's a contradiction, so why is anyone even throwing it out there?

Quote:But the old caveat always applies: we don't know what we don't know.

I guess I'm just stubborn. I'm not willing to consider things that are not logical, as merely being a limitation of what I know.

Quote:
(15-02-2014 09:49 PM)toadaly Wrote:  In 'possible worlds' semantics, the minimum possible world, must neverthess include the axioms of logic.

Why?

Without noncontradiction, contradictions become actual. That isn't possible, by the very definition of 'possible'. So any world we want to imagine, in order to be possible, must include the axioms of logic.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2014, 12:20 AM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
I NEED to understand everything, even if its a superficial understanding.
Pre expansion and quantum level stuff hurts my brain literally.
I get a head ache .

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2014, 01:15 AM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
(16-02-2014 01:48 PM)goldenmustache Wrote:  this is how it was put together.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorg.html

Really? "Godandscience.org" ? Laughat



A group that can't even agree as to how old the world is on its forums?

Laugh out load

Tell you what. When they stop banning people who post links to science pages "Because they don't want evolution propaganda." spread into their forum, maybe people will even think about glancing at said site.

Very much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
17-02-2014, 02:07 AM
RE: The origin paradox. "something from nothing"
Guys, it is a mistake to try to deduce the logic of physical processes that take place outside of human common sense. Philosophy using human common sense and deduction won't be able to answer the origin question. Physics is.

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: