What is nothing?

[Randolpin]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

Again, these are just your beliefs. I don't believe any of them to be true. There is no reason to.

Please provide the "evidence from cosmology".

This is not just my beliefs. This are true. God is the best explanation for the data gathered in cosmology, morality, mathematics, metaphysics, and personal life.

In cosmology, please wait, I will provide it.

[DrP]

14 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

 This are true. God is the best explanation for the data gathered in cosmology, morality, mathematics, metaphysics, and personal life.

In cosmology, please wait, I will provide it.

Saying over and over just doesn't make it true though. Your 'daily affirmations' may well help you keep up your faith....  that's because you are brainwashing yourself.

 

[Strange]

22 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

This is not just my beliefs. This are true. God is the best explanation for the data gathered in cosmology, morality, mathematics, metaphysics, and personal life.

You only think this is true because you believe it. I see no reason to think it is true.

[Manticore]

"God" is just a way of avoiding explanations.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Randolpin said:

This is not just my beliefs. This are true. God is the best explanation for the data gathered in cosmology, morality, mathematics, metaphysics, and personal life.

In cosmology, please wait, I will provide it.

!

Moderator Note

This act is getting old, Randolpin.

1. Preaching is against the rules; this is posted in philosophy, not religion.

2. You need to be providing the evidence when you post. Not sometime later.

 

[beecee]

6 hours ago, Randolpin said:

It is necessary because there is no explanation for why this the property of the universe and not the other way around which denotes volition.

No it is not necessary...It is simply one speculative answer and a non scientific answer as well. Scientists continue to explore, experiment, observe, and just as we now know [without ever being there] that the distant twinkles we see in the night sky are just other stars similar more or less to our Sun, so to in time, we may know more detail of the evolution of the Universe.

Again, reasonable speculation tells us the Universe arose from nothing...https://www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from-nothing/                              I see far more logic in that explanation, rather then  clinging to mythical beliefs about some magic being/deity. Ancient man may have needed such myths even to explain the natural cycles of day and night, but we now know better.

[nec209]

On 2017-08-03 at 8:46 AM, Randolpin said:

I already defined what is the actual nothing.

Your post is hard to understand. Are you asking if the universe is nothing? What happen before the big bang when there was nothing? What will happen in the future when the universe cools down and expands and there is nothing? The end of times?

What happen before you born aka nothing or when you die and there is nothing?

Or trying to understand if there no matter what nothing? All black and darkness nothing.

Edited August 29, 2017 by nec209

[Randolpin]

On 8/22/2017 at 9:59 PM, Strange said:

You only think this is true because you believe it. I see no reason to think it is true.

 I am not simply believe it. This is logical argument which I thought for several months.

[Strange]

15 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

 I am not simply believe it. This is logical argument which I thought for several months.

You have provided no logical argument. You have simply said it is true because it must be true (because you believe it).

[Randolpin]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

You have provided no logical argument. You have simply said it is true because it must be true (because you believe it).

There is a logical argument there- Why this is the property of the universe other than anything else? From here we can see that it denotes volition. Example, a man put a shoe inside a box and put it in the woods and go away. And here you do hiking on the woods and you see the box and open it. Here you wonder, why a shoe is inside a box and not the other way around like for example a slipper. You would probably conclude that the shoe must be chosen to be put inside the box. Here we see that it must requires volition. There is no flaw in logic here. Tell me if there is.

[Strange]

16 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

There is a logical argument there- Why this is the property of the universe other than anything else? From here we can see that it denotes volition.

Why does it denote volition? I see no reason to think that. It is just an expression of your belief. It could be chance. It could be the result of some physics we are not yet aware of. It could be many things.

Quote

Example, a man put a shoe inside a box and put it in the woods and go away. And here you do hiking on the woods and you see the box and open it. Here you wonder, why a shoe is inside a box and not the other way around like for example a slipper. You would probably conclude that the shoe must be chosen to be put inside the box. Here we see that it must requires volition.

But you are talking about the actions of a person (we know people exist) putting a shoe (we know they exist) in a box (we know boxes exist) and putting the box in the woods (we know woods exist). This is distinctly odd behaviour but plausible in terms of things we know.

You then extrapolate from human action on physical objects to assume that the universe must have been created in the same way by something for which we have no evidence. This is not logical. It is barely rational. It is statement of your belief.

Quote

There is no flaw in logic here. Tell me if there is.

This is basically the fallacy of begging the question: you believe that the universe must have been created by your god and then create a roundabout argument to support this belief.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/53/Begging_the_Question

Edited September 4, 2017 by Strange

[Manticore]

There is no flaw in the logic because there is no logic.

[Strange]

19 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

There is no flaw in logic here. Tell me if there is.

I apologise. This may not be "begging the question". It is closer to "false analogy". This is the basic argument used by Intelligent Design IDiots and Creationists: "life looks like it was designed therefore there must be a designer". Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logical-fallacies

Edited September 4, 2017 by Strange

[Randolpin]

On 8/22/2017 at 9:16 PM, Strange said:

It might make you think that. It doesn't make me think that. So it is just opinion/belief. It doesn't matter how convincing you find your belief, it doesn't make it true.

 

Tell me by the way why you don't think that before I will respond.

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

I apologise. This may not be "begging the question". It is closer to "false analogy". This is the basic argument used by Intelligent Design IDiots and Creationists: "life looks like it was designed therefore there must be a designer". Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logical-fallacies

They conclude that because they have use good arguments to support that and they philosophize properly.

Edited September 4, 2017 by Randolpin

[Handy andy]

Nothing = Something/infinity

[Strange]

3 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

Tell me by the way why you don't think that before I will respond.

As I said, I see no reason to think it is true. It is just an assumption on your part. There are other reasons why the universe is the way it is. You have chosen one. But you have chosen one that (a) requires you to invent an entity (violating Occam's razor) and (b) has no supporting evidence. I would choose one that doesn't require the invention of unnecessary entities and has supporting evidence.

Quote

They conclude that because they have use good arguments to support that and they philosophize properly.

If you think that, then there is probably little point continuing the discussion as you are clearly incapable of critical thought. 

They use lies and distortions of the facts to support their beliefs. That is neither a good argument nor proper philosophy. It is dishonest.

[Randolpin]

6 minutes ago, Strange said:

As I said, I see no reason to think it is true. It is just an assumption on your part. There are other reasons why the universe is the way it is. You have chosen one. But you have chosen one that (a) requires you to invent an entity (violating Occam's razor) and (b) has no supporting evidence. I would choose one that doesn't require the invention of unnecessary entities and has supporting evidence.

If you think that, then there is probably little point continuing the discussion as you are clearly incapable of critical thought. 

They use lies and distortions of the facts to support their beliefs. That is neither a good argument nor proper philosophy. It is dishonest.

I would actually ask you also to give your evidences for your claims.

So what must be the other explanation for why this is the property of the universe and not the other way around. I will argue that there is none other than my argument. You can provide if there is any? And I will sincerely expound my thoughts with regards to this in the next days. 

Edited September 4, 2017 by Randolpin

[Strange]

7 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

I would actually ask you also to give your evidences for your claims.

What claims?

9 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

So what must be the other explanation for why this is the property of the universe and not the other way around.

There are many other possibilities. Let's go with the simplest: pure chance.

22 minutes ago, Randolpin said:

So what must be the other explanation for why this is the property of the universe and not the other way around.

By the way, can you clarify what "this" refers to in that sentence?

And what does "the other way round" mean? 

[Manticore]

17 hours ago, Handy andy said:

Nothing = Something/infinity

Something/infinity = NaN (Not a Number).

[Handy andy]

2 hours ago, Manticore said:

Something/infinity = NaN (Not a Number).

0 is a number indicating nothing, 0 space is nothing. A something that takes up space and is sliced an infinite number of times is as good as nothing, or is as near as damn it nothing. 

It could also be considered as just a point in space which is something in the space it occupies, but if nothing exists outside zero space it is nothing.

A forth dimension inside a wormhole could be nothing, that links two points separated by three dimensional space. Wormholes would work like quantum entanglement where c is not the limit of speed for information transfer. The information has transferred from one three dimensional space to another separated via a distance instantly through nothing or a 4th dimension connecting entangled objects.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Handy andy

[Manticore]

Infinity is not a number, so you can't use it as a number in performing mathematical operations.

[Randolpin]

23 hours ago, Strange said:

What claims?

 

Please clarify, what are your bases for saying that to "design" philosopers?

23 hours ago, Strange said:

There are many other possibilities. Let's go with the simplest: pure chance.

 

If chance so why chance and not "determined"?  So it is still subject to volition argument.

23 hours ago, Strange said:

And what does "the other way round" mean? 

Those other possibilties of what would our universe look like other than this.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Randolpin