Vexen Posted March 16, 2019 Author Posted March 16, 2019 11 minutes ago, iNow said: Where? God - the Failed Hypothesis by Victor J. Stenger
QuantumT Posted March 16, 2019 Posted March 16, 2019 43 minutes ago, Vexen said: Why is there something rather than nothing? Probably because of the Higgs Boson.
Vexen Posted March 16, 2019 Author Posted March 16, 2019 4 minutes ago, QuantumT said: Probably because of the Higgs Boson. Can you explain further?
QuantumT Posted March 16, 2019 Posted March 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, Vexen said: Can you explain further? My knowledge is not sufficient enough to elaborate on the Higgs yet. 1
beecee Posted March 16, 2019 Posted March 16, 2019 (edited) The evidence for the BB tells us that the universe evolved from a hotter, denser state at t=10-43 seconds to what we see today, 13.83 billion years later. Science/cosmology explains the formation of matter, the elements, stars, planets, galaxies etc with reasonable competency. Before that, at this time we can only make an educated hypothesis. This is one that I believe holds promise. https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/ Why is there something rather then nothing? That's just the way the cookie crumbles. What really needs to be defined, is what is nothing imo. Edited March 16, 2019 by beecee 1
Itoero Posted March 16, 2019 Posted March 16, 2019 Quote Follow 0 Why is there something rather than nothing? Because people say there is something.
Strange Posted March 17, 2019 Posted March 17, 2019 13 hours ago, Vexen said: I read somewhere that nothing is unstable. I don’t see how “nothing” can be unstable, there wouldn’t be anything to be unstable. And I am not going to listen to an entire (stupid sounding) audiobook to see if it makes any sense. Why is there something? Because there is. Because if there weren’t, we wouldn’t be here to ask the question. This is not a question science can answer. It is one for philosophy or religion (but they can only answer by making something up). 1
Eise Posted March 17, 2019 Posted March 17, 2019 16 hours ago, Vexen said: I read somewhere that nothing is unstable. That is not true: some things are unstable. 1
swansont Posted March 17, 2019 Posted March 17, 2019 19 hours ago, Vexen said: God - the Failed Hypothesis by Victor J. Stenger ! Moderator Note You need to do better than a link to an audiobook.
Airbrush Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Air is not nothing. You can't see it, but it is a gas. Space is not nothing. Just because you cannot see, detect, or define empty space, doesn't mean it is nothing. The something we can see, came out of something we cannot see. 1
Thorham Posted March 20, 2019 Posted March 20, 2019 Because it seems nonsense that something can come from absolute nothingness.
DrP Posted March 20, 2019 Posted March 20, 2019 17 minutes ago, Thorham said: Because it seems nonsense that something can come from absolute nothingness. not sure anyone really claims it did... depends on how you define 'nothing' as mentioned above. 21 hours ago, Airbrush said: Just because you cannot see, detect, or define empty space, doesn't mean it is nothing. The something we can see, came out of something we cannot see. On 3/16/2019 at 8:13 PM, beecee said: The evidence for the BB tells us that the universe evolved from a hotter, denser state at t=10-43 seconds to what we see today, 13.83 billion years later. Science/cosmology explains the formation of matter, the elements, stars, planets, galaxies etc with reasonable competency. Before that, at this time we can only make an educated hypothesis. This is one that I believe holds promise. https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/ Why is there something rather then nothing? That's just the way the cookie crumbles. What really needs to be defined, is what is nothing imo.
beecee Posted March 20, 2019 Posted March 20, 2019 6 hours ago, Thorham said: Because it seems nonsense that something can come from absolute nothingness. Define nothing. The only scientific answer is that the quantum foam [possibly the closest to nothingness that is ever able to exist] has existed for an infinite amount of time.
Intrigued Posted March 21, 2019 Posted March 21, 2019 When I attempt to contemplate "nothing" I get trapped in an endless spiral of confusion and chaos. I infer from this that I am not intelligent enough to understand "nothing". I don't know if any human is intelligent enough for that, but if they are I am reasonably sure I not even intelligent enough to understand any simplified explanation they would be inclinded to give. Consequently I have found it a sensible policy to focus on what appears to be real. That seems to be sufficient to be going on with.
Airbrush Posted March 23, 2019 Posted March 23, 2019 On 3/21/2019 at 1:46 AM, Intrigued said: When I attempt to contemplate "nothing" I get trapped in an endless spiral of confusion and chaos. I infer from this that I am not intelligent enough to understand "nothing". I don't know if any human is intelligent enough for that, but if they are I am reasonably sure I not even intelligent enough to understand any simplified explanation they would be inclinded to give. Consequently I have found it a sensible policy to focus on what appears to be real. That seems to be sufficient to be going on with. "Nothing" never existed, nor will it ever exist.
zapatos Posted March 23, 2019 Posted March 23, 2019 On 3/21/2019 at 3:46 AM, Intrigued said: I infer from this that I am not intelligent enough to understand "nothing". I don't know if any human is intelligent enough for that... Don't mean to brag, but I have no problem at all understanding "nothing".
Intrigued Posted March 23, 2019 Posted March 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Airbrush said: "Nothing" never existed, nor will it ever exist. That is a confident assertion, but can you justify it without resorting to metaphysics or some other branch of philosophy? However, don't waste time trying to answer that question: the subtext of my post was "Let's not waste time considering nothing, let's just think about something." 54 minutes ago, zapatos said: Don't mean to brag, but I have no problem at all understanding "nothing". There you go! Sometimes all it takes is putting the word nothing in a sentence and I am immediately lost.
Airbrush Posted March 25, 2019 Posted March 25, 2019 On 3/23/2019 at 2:25 PM, Intrigued said: That is a confident assertion [that "nothing" never existed], but can you justify it without resorting to metaphysics or some other branch of philosophy? However, don't waste time trying to answer that question: the subtext of my post was "Let's not waste time considering nothing, let's just think about something." It's just hard to imagine how, when, or where, absolutely nothing ever existed. If a big bang came out of it, then that potential for a big bang is not nothing.
beecee Posted March 25, 2019 Posted March 25, 2019 34 minutes ago, Airbrush said: It's just hard to imagine how, when, or where, absolutely nothing ever existed. If a big bang came out of it, then that potential for a big bang is not nothing. Perhaps as I have suggested previously, we need to define what nothing is. Perhaps the quantum foam, from whence the BB evolved, [is as close to nothing as most of us perceive nothing] as we can get...
zapatos Posted March 25, 2019 Posted March 25, 2019 5 minutes ago, beecee said: Perhaps as I have suggested previously, we need to define what nothing is. Perhaps the quantum foam, from whence the BB evolved, [is as close to nothing as most of us perceive nothing] as we can get... That makes no sense to me. You are essentially saying 'nothing equals something (foam)'.
StringJunky Posted March 25, 2019 Posted March 25, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, zapatos said: That makes no sense to me. You are essentially saying 'nothing equals something (foam)'. Any entity less than a quantum has no effect on anything; it may as well be nothing. A quantum is the minimum energy required to have an effect on stuff. Edited March 25, 2019 by StringJunky
zapatos Posted March 25, 2019 Posted March 25, 2019 34 minutes ago, StringJunky said: Any entity less than a quantum has no effect on anything; it may as well be nothing. A quantum is the minimum energy required to have an effect on stuff. So the quantum foam has an effect on stuff? Doesn't that imply it is not 'nothing', but only the closest thing to nothing that we might be able to achieve in nature?
StringJunky Posted March 25, 2019 Posted March 25, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, zapatos said: So the quantum foam has an effect on stuff? Doesn't that imply it is not 'nothing', but only the closest thing to nothing that we might be able to achieve in nature? I forgot to to add that most of the virtual particles add up to 'nothing' most of the time but sometimes two collide/interact and make a quantum. They may annihilate eventually, I'm not sure. The foam is nothing in the sense that much of the time it has no effect on the quantum world and then only intermittently. I think that's what scientists in this subject mean by nothing. I think this is one of those cases where a word means something a bit different to what we are used to. Edited March 25, 2019 by StringJunky
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now