🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:19:52 UTC No. 16284839
Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing. So why does the universe even exist at all?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:21:36 UTC No. 16284844
>Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing.
proof?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:32:02 UTC No. 16284856
>>16284839
Why do you assume nothing is the default state that had to "gain" something for universe to exist? Why can't you assume universe existing is the default state?
>inb4 there was nothing before big bang
No, the universe and everything in it existed, it was just compressed. Nothing was created.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:37:18 UTC No. 16284862
>>16284856
>the universe and everything in it existed, it was just compressed.
Where did this compressed universe come from?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:53:06 UTC No. 16284876
Define 'nothing'
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:53:30 UTC No. 16284877
God, who exists outside of time and space, made it.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:56:14 UTC No. 16284880
>>16284877
Prove it.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 13:02:35 UTC No. 16284888
>>16284862
Where implies space. Space didn't exist before space existed retarded. You're effectively asking something like
>What was my name 50 years before I was born?
Just because you can ask a question doesn't mean the question has any meaning.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 13:23:41 UTC No. 16284918
>implying the big bang happened
>implying the universe exists
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 13:45:09 UTC No. 16284962
>>16284839
If we assign God a value of infinity and all his creations as a real number less than infinity it solves your logical issue. In reality something always comes from something bigger/stronger/hotter/faster/ect. It's basically entropy.
>>16284844
>Logic isn't real, i'm going to need a peer reviewed source saying logic is logical.
>t. a literal retard
>>16284856
>Just compress it all bro
>>t. a literal retard
>>16284877
He gets it
>>16284880
asked and answered
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-
>>16284888
Your name was always what it was meant to be. So 1000 years ago the you you are today would still end up having that name. You see it was and always was and always will be. Your name was always what it was, even before you were born....or do you allege your name was different 50 years ago? If so what was the different name vs the actual name and how do you explain this discrepancy? Checkmate chud.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 13:50:10 UTC No. 16284973
>>16284962
Use logic to show that something can't come from nothing.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 16:30:50 UTC No. 16285203
>>16284962
what the hell is this guy on about lol
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 16:42:12 UTC No. 16285214
The prime brute fact is a quantum vacuum bubbling with tiny fluctuations. Essentially white noise buzzing about.
After a long time, complex things emerge from the noise by pure chance (think infinite monkeys eventually managing to type out Shakespeare’s works).
If that thing is a self-replicating pattern, it can keep growing against the noise background without being fully destroyed by any random noise, so it becomes a stable thing for a very long time.
This self-replicating thing was the inflaton that expands very fast as time passes, increasing in total energy content as it goes.
Eventually the random noise causes a portion of the inflaton to collapse into a big bang event. And eventually the released energy turns into matter and more complex things down the line.
This means that the big bang is a general event that can happen from time to time in the inflaton = multiple universes.
This is the most natural and simple explanation and fits nicely into the current best theory that is inflation.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 16:43:20 UTC No. 16285216
>>16284962
Fine tuned universe is an argument for a selection effect from multiple universes lol, not God.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 22:31:29 UTC No. 16285642
>>16285216
>there are infinite unobservable universes which explains the inconvenience of materialist theories
Ah yes, the one solution to finally unite all of the sciences
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:20:45 UTC No. 16285710
>>16285214
makes me think of a rogue wave, but quantum
Garrote at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:22:00 UTC No. 16285712
because there was something before
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:28:58 UTC No. 16285721
because the whole something from nothing is bullshit. the big bang model stuck at planck time. you can't reverse the differential equations anymore. we don't know what the fuck happened there and we might never know unless we find new physics. the fake and fradulent like Lawrence Krauss took advantage of the atheist movement and grifted the whole "something from nothing" bullshit that got popular in the last decade. it's literally just creationism put on a new hide so the frauds like him can say "look, we solved the origin of the universe just from pure physics" to get talk show money from the retarded card carrying atheists.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:30:04 UTC No. 16285723
yes, what I am saying is that there was definitely something before the big bang. we don't even know if the big bang is true.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:41:36 UTC No. 16285738
>>16285721
>>16285723
The ”big bang from nothing” is an idea from waaaaaay back and has since been replaced by inflation. Why people are still spouting it I have no idea.
Read here if you want to know what was before the big bang: https://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:43:52 UTC No. 16285742
>>16285642
>Multiple universes
That does indeed solve fine tuning
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:50:21 UTC No. 16285753
>>16284839
you probably can but you have to create something and anti-something at the same time.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:53:24 UTC No. 16285757
>>16285721
Yes, making vacuum fluctuations equivalent to nothing is extreme coping. They think the universe is some kind of jewish accounting trick where if you balance at zero then it is somehow nothing.
The pending paradigm shift is from materialism to physicalism. The two are supposed to be equivalent, but they really aren't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUp
>physicists posits that adding some radius zero fields into equations will balance everything without the need for new particles
If such a thing were true, all material conditions likely result from radius zero interactions by principles of self-similarity and simplicity. There can be no predecessor to a zero field. It also opens doors to how science chooses to shut down non-sensical mathematics, like negative probabilities and such. Like avoiding division by zero, the preference to fit the world into terms we readily understand is not really good justification for them to be those terms.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:55:31 UTC No. 16285761
>>16284839
>So why does the universe even exist at all?
Delicious cinnamon rolls.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:59:24 UTC No. 16285771
>>16285721
>>16285757
True, Vishnu created everything.
>But what created Vishnu?
STOP ASKING QUESTIONS
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:00:32 UTC No. 16285775
>>16284839
I don't know anyone who believes in nothing except theists. But even the bible says God made earth out of the waters, and he never made the waters.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:05:13 UTC No. 16285780
>>16285771
Another turtle
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:07:00 UTC No. 16285783
>stuff can either be forever or have a beginning/end
>human mind cannot grasp that something can be finite
>human mind cannot grasp that something can be infinite
>frustration ensues
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:12:56 UTC No. 16285793
>>16285710
Yea like a rogue wave is a good way of seeing it. Just that this rogue wave has to be long lasting and growing for it to eventually contain complex patterns like observers.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:46:29 UTC No. 16285821
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:47:16 UTC No. 16285822
>>16284962
>asked and answered
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine
argument from incredulity.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 05:59:20 UTC No. 16286079
>>16285775
That's pretty cool
I wish schizoposters were half as interesting as you
They just write non sense
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:32:14 UTC No. 16286159
>>16284839
More proof that we are living in a simulation
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:36:43 UTC No. 16286165
>>16284839
How do we know there was nothing before?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:37:45 UTC No. 16286168
>>16284862
>"where did the universe come from?"
>"it don't have to come from anything, it always existed, it was just compressed before"
>"okay, where did the universe come from?"
Jesus christ dude
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:41:37 UTC No. 16286177
>literally every single fucking observation confirms the first law of thermodynamics, that energy (and therefore matter) cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system
>retards keep asking how energy/matter of the closed system that in universe was created
It always existed, get over it. There's no reason to assume otherwise.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 09:09:05 UTC No. 16286475
>>16285214
That doesn't answer the question, because your chain of events doesn't start with absolutely nothing existing, it starts with "quantum vacuum bubbling with tiny fluctuations".
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 09:16:02 UTC No. 16286500
The only answer that makes any sense is that existence has always existed.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 12:21:47 UTC No. 16287091
>>16284839
>So why does the universe even exist at all?
Because it has always existed. The Big Bang was not an "event" or a "start" or even a moment: it's the entire universe, all the matter and all the energy superimposed when you look back. It's infinitely far away in space and time, and the further back we look, the more there will be to look back onto. Mark my words.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:10:43 UTC No. 16287133
>>16286177
The universe is actually increasing in total energy content with time. And if energy could never increase you would be stuck at a fat 0 forever.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:14:39 UTC No. 16287137
>>16287091
No, the current understanding and consensus among physicists is that there were things before the big bang. You are spouting an old theory that physicists used because they could not see further back than the CMB (so it had to come from nothing because we can’t reach further back).
If you are interested in the modern understanding of what was before the big bang read the link here: >>16285738
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:15:55 UTC No. 16287138
>>16286177
Reality isn't a closed system per-se, yes, it's not bleeding energy out anywhere, but at the same time it's not losing energy or approaching thermodynamic equilibrium, since it always reuses the energy already present to restart reactions
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:16:29 UTC No. 16287141
>>16286500
An infinite past is obviously false. You can not have passed an infinite amount of time and end up on the other end where we are now.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:17:40 UTC No. 16287142
>>16287138
It is gaining energy because things are accelerating and space is expanding and space has a non-zero energy.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:20:46 UTC No. 16287145
>>16287142
Things don't gain energy, they merely borrow it from their surroundings, the rest mass for the universe is fixed
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:25:37 UTC No. 16287153
>>16287145
No, that is not true for the universe.
https://www.preposterousuniverse.co
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:29:30 UTC No. 16287158
>>16284962
Based. Christ is king and soience nerds will weep upon judgement
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:38:42 UTC No. 16287162
>>16287153
>blog
>already stating false information two paragraphs in
Yup, into the trash it goes
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:45:06 UTC No. 16287172
>>16287162
It’s a blog where he summarizes current understandings, as if you were ever going to read a full paper anyways. The gist is:
1. Space has non-zero energy
2. Space is not static but expands
3. Therefore energy is not conserved.
And besides, if energy was not constantly ticking up, you would be stuck at 0 forever. And that’s not the case.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:48:02 UTC No. 16287177
>>16287172
>if energy was not constantly ticking up, you would be stuck at 0 forever.
Wrong, you would be stuck with the rest mass of the universe, which is nonzero
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:48:47 UTC No. 16287179
>>16284839
proof that there was nothing before universe existed?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:52:17 UTC No. 16287187
>>16287177
The energy was dumped into our universe from the collapsing inflaton after inflation. It never was something static or eternal into the past.
You are parroting an idea from like 1970 that has since been replaced in the current physics landscape.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:59:20 UTC No. 16287202
>>16287187
Yes, yes, I know already, all the energy came from a magical la-la land where reality does whatever you want it to do as long as you claim it happened, not enough evidence for me.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:02:47 UTC No. 16287209
>>16287202
You’re the one that claims the sum total of the universe’s energy content comes from nothing.
And inflation has very strong evidence and is the current standard in physics.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:05:41 UTC No. 16287210
>>16287209
>comes from nothing
Reality didn't come from anything, it has always existed, "nothing" only exists in abstract concepts, physically there is no such thing
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:09:25 UTC No. 16287212
>>16284877
The universe exists outside of time and space
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:13:09 UTC No. 16287222
>>16287210
Sure, and the first thing was an ever increasing inflaton that sourced all the energy we see today. Again, total energy is not static and there is no evidence to believe it is. And all of the evidence point to it increasing.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:15:12 UTC No. 16287225
>>16287222
>the first thing was an ever increasing inflaton
And what did this inflation come from, if not nothing? Do you even understand what you are saying?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:18:34 UTC No. 16287231
>>16287225
I’m giving the same answer you are, the difference is just what the first object was.
The inflaton or our total universe/big bang.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:22:19 UTC No. 16287234
>>16287231
>The inflaton or our total universe/big bang.
So you admit the energy was already there, there was no increase, the rest mass is always the same
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:25:03 UTC No. 16287238
>>16287234
No, the inflaton was the first thing and it has the property that it increases in volume and energy. Any model with non-increasing energy is wrong because we have solid evidence that the energy content is going up.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:25:47 UTC No. 16287239
>>16287238
>the inflaton was the first thing
And where did this "first thing" come from if not from nothing?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:29:05 UTC No. 16287241
>>16287239
I don’t know, we can’t reach that far back. My personal belief is that there is no pure ”nothing” and that closest thing is a vacuum with small bubbling fluctuations.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 14:31:26 UTC No. 16287245
>>16287241
You can't reach that far back because there is nothing to reach to, because nothing doesn't exist, there has always been something, that is the way reality works
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 17:44:15 UTC No. 16287485
This topic is apparently a great shit test to differentiate those who can understand infinity (eternity) from those who cant. The amount of people ITT that keep insisting that something must start somewhere or be at a state of zero at some point is pretty significant
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 18:38:20 UTC No. 16287539
>>16287485
Don't pretend that you can wrap your mind around existence having always been here.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 18:58:07 UTC No. 16287568
>dude I totally know everything about the entire universe!!!
>I'm super smart like god an sheeeiiiittttt
>also I don't believe in god
Ernest Jones, in 1913, was the first to construe extreme narcissism, which he called the "God-complex", as a character flaw. He described people with God-complex as being aloof, self-important, overconfident, auto-erotic, inaccessible, self-admiring, and exhibitionistic, with fantasies of omnipotence and omniscience. He observed that these people had a high need for uniqueness.
Simulacrum at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 22:05:21 UTC No. 16287800
>>16284839
>Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing.
No it doesn't.
>So why does the universe even exist at all?
What if there isn't a why? What if the universe is eternal so is time? The question presupposes that the universe had a beginning, and that it had a cause. But even if the universe had a beginning, that does not mean it had a cause. Radioactive decay has a beginning, but as far as the empirical evidence is concerned, it does not have a cause. No one knows whether the universe had or has a cause or not.
>>16284962
> In reality something always comes from something bigger/stronger/hotter/faster/ect. It's basically entropy.
What you described was not entropy. You have no idea what entropy is.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 22:07:53 UTC No. 16287802
>>16284839
It doesn't exist. The universe in the end balances to 0
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Jul 2024 22:52:06 UTC No. 16287843
>>16284839
>Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing.
this is the answer to your question. there was never an absolutely nothing to begin with. the framework of reality exists because it just does.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:21:11 UTC No. 16288087
>>16284839
>Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing.
No, logic dictates that nothing is something, so you necessarily get something from nothing because nothing is itself and that is something.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:24:44 UTC No. 16288091
>>16284856
>Why do you assume nothing is the default state that had to "gain" something for universe to exist?
Arithmetic.
>Why can't you assume universe existing is the default state?
Because it is a logical necessity that the multiplicative annihilator reduce a variable to 0%, rather than 100%.
>Nothing was created.
Then you still gained something and haven gotten around the thing you were complaining about.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:26:40 UTC No. 16288096
>>16287212
Nothing is what comes before the beginning and after the end, so it definitely exists outside time and space too.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:29:01 UTC No. 16288100
>>16284888
>Space didn't exist before space existed retarded.
You just said that it did exist because it was compressed, you never said it didn't exist, your whole point was that universe always expands because it always existed.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:34:18 UTC No. 16288102
>>16284962
>If we assign God a value of infinity
It makes more sense to assign god the value of 0 and describe the infinitely falling man as the never ending value.
>Logic isn't real
No, your claim isn't real logic. Mathematical logic says that everything necessarily results as a function of nothing. 100% = 0!
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine
That link doesn't prove your claim, it speculates about many different reasons how a fine-tuned universe could arise.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:38:04 UTC No. 16288106
>>16285721
Nothing is something or you wouldn't be talking about it so much and getting so angry about it.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:41:13 UTC No. 16288107
>>16286168
So what compressed it and what is it inflating into?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:46:19 UTC No. 16288111
>>16287141
You can if time slows down as you go to the past and accelerates as you go to the future.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:47:46 UTC No. 16288112
>>16287145
>Things don't gain energy
Wrong, L2 Casimir Effect.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:51:02 UTC No. 16288116
>>16287177
Prove that the universe can be at rest.
Hard Mode: Prove what you are saying can work without adding in a bunch of fudged dark matter mass to force the equilibrium to be calculated.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:52:04 UTC No. 16288117
>>16287179
1 universe - 1 universe = 0
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:56:32 UTC No. 16288119
>>16287210
>it has always existed,
Which means it came from nothing.
> physically there is no such thing
I am physically holding nothing in my open hand right now (inb4 air, no air holds me), I can physically see nothing with my own two ears at all times, so it must physically exist, if it didn't things couldn't even be in contact as there would have to always be something else between them and things could stop or reverse direction since pigeonhole principle proves you have to momentarily stop to reverse direction, heck things couldn't even be themselves without nothing to differential something from itself.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:58:46 UTC No. 16288121
>>16287245
>You can't reach that far back because there is nothing to reach to, because nothing doesn't exist,
It must exist for you to reach to it as you just said.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 06:00:42 UTC No. 16288123
>>16287485
Nothing is the most ideal infinite object since it is only itself repeated indefinitely instead a bunch of other values.
>something must start somewhere or be at a state of zero at some point is pretty significant
Math proves that everything definitely does result from a function of purely nothing since 100% = 0!.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 06:35:16 UTC No. 16288142
>>16288096
the universe is nothing
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 06:45:19 UTC No. 16288148
>>16288142
The universe is a function of nothing, not all of it, there will always be much more to nothing than some singular universe can ever entail.
100% = 0! + 0 + 0 + 0 + ...
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 06:46:26 UTC No. 16288149
>>16288148
Yes
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 06:50:17 UTC No. 16288153
>>16284880
>Prove it.
God is an axiom. QED. Checkmate atheists.
>which one?
There is only one, all monotheistic religion refer to the same God, all polytheistic religion is false. QED. Checkmate yet again, just kys now lolmao
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 07:13:03 UTC No. 16288168
https://x.com/ashleevance/status/18
Ok now this is epic
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 07:19:29 UTC No. 16288171
>>16288153
No, axioms are formal and precise, you are being vague and informally mashing together anything anyone calls god.
>all monotheistic religion refer to the same God,
No, different religions use entirely different and often conflicting properties to define their gods.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 10:32:43 UTC No. 16288255
>>16288153
>my axiom is a complex mystical creature who thinks and creates things
how convenient
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 10:40:13 UTC No. 16288256
>>16288153
>my axiom is a complex mystical creature who thinks and creates things just like how I think and create a folder on my PC
how convenient. btw how did such a complex mystical creature come from absolutely nothing?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:05:32 UTC No. 16288268
>>16288256
One day at a time.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:37:42 UTC No. 16288279
>>16288256
Most powerful entity just exists by default, if He didn't then he wouldn't be the most powerful. Is it that hard to understand basic logic? If you can comprehend the universe existing from nothing surely you can comprehend that the top 1 Entity just exists by definition.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:46:24 UTC No. 16288288
>>16288279
Its hard because noting in reality is ever that stable, there is never one best thing, energy fluctuates and what is the best tends to change from day to day, but nothing, I can see that with my own two feet.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:49:29 UTC No. 16288289
>>16288288
Nothing is 0, God is infinity. Hope that helps.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:54:51 UTC No. 16288298
>>16288289
A lot of things are 0, infinity isn't a thing, it is the lack of a thing, the lack of an end.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Jul 2024 12:13:32 UTC No. 16288314
>>16288289
>Nothing is 0
Then how many crudely cut jew cocks are squeezing in and out of your various orifices right now?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 02:18:37 UTC No. 16289120
Why does logic and math work the way it does? What the hell dictated that 2 + 2 is 4 and what isn't false is true.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 02:25:13 UTC No. 16289126
>>16288322
>nothing that exists hasn't been created (except god)
Special pleading
>matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed
No special pleading
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 02:40:51 UTC No. 16289138
>>16284839
Being and Nothing synthesize into Becoming.
Read The Science of Logic.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 13:59:16 UTC No. 16289563
>>16284839
What's so freaky about this is that it's a paradox however you look at it. At first it seems like not existing is the most logical thing. But try thinking about it for more than a second and you'll realize that not existing is impossible. Even if you "didn't exist for infinity years" that's still zero time you exist. So you have to exist, Try thinking about it in terms of one and zero if you don't get it. but how we exist makes absolutely no fucking sense at all. So fuck this question. It's seriously the question I hate the most in the world.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 14:10:41 UTC No. 16289579
>>16284918
>Denying the facts, everything you see, even the universe itself.
The most primitive coping mechanism that reduces so called scientists to babies with fingers in their ears. The funniest one but it happens more than you would think and it's also the saddest one.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 14:25:51 UTC No. 16289596
>>16285738
This is the shit I come to /sci/ for!
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 15:23:33 UTC No. 16289678
>>16284839
>Logic dictates
Logic doesn't dicatate anything, you dictate logic to be dicating something to you, also nothing can be divided in to something 0 = 1 + (-)1
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 15:24:35 UTC No. 16289680
>>16284876
Impossible
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 20:02:35 UTC No. 16290001
>>16284839
>Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing.
it doesn't.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 21:42:40 UTC No. 16290135
>>16284839
>Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing.
This is wrong, you seem to confusing logic with ontology/metaphysics. Logic is just the structure of reasoning, and has little to do with what actually exists.
>All somethings come from nothing
>This is something
>Therefore, it comes from nothing
Perfectly valid argument by analysing its structure.
Dave at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 21:47:01 UTC No. 16290138
>>16284839
>Logic dictates that you can't get something from absolutely nothing.
it's not that simple
you can find good videos about it on youtube
there never was nothing is one of the options
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 21:52:42 UTC No. 16290144
>>16284844
0 ≠1
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 22:30:49 UTC No. 16290176
>>16290138
>there never was nothing is one of the options
Okay... but WHY is there something at all?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 22:40:04 UTC No. 16290187
>>16286159
Is the universe that the simulation lives in also a simulation? Is it simulations all the way down?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 23:43:55 UTC No. 16290264
>>16288119
>I am physically holding nothing in my open hand right now (inb4 air, no air holds me), I can physically see nothing with my own two ears at all times, so it must physically exist
No, even empty space is infact something.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jul 2024 23:50:04 UTC No. 16290269
>>16290264
>nothing is something
Well if you redefine nothing to be something then I guess nothing really doesn't exist
Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jul 2024 00:46:48 UTC No. 16290297
>>16290269
Nothing is not something you can comprehend it is beyond the human capability to imagine. Empty space isn't nothing its empty space. You can move through it it has relative dimensions. It is something.
Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jul 2024 19:50:24 UTC No. 16291282
>>16284876
absence of perceivable to us matter
Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jul 2024 21:06:57 UTC No. 16291428
>>16291282
Hard disagree on that.
I'd say Absence of anything including non-things.
Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jul 2024 23:44:50 UTC No. 16291607
>>16284839
I would presume some niggerlicious mathematical proof that describes the topology of the universe and justifies things existing but idk
Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jul 2024 23:55:58 UTC No. 16291615
How could the universe have always existed? Thinking about it hurts my brain. How could something ALWAYS have existed with no beginning?
[WONDER] at Sun, 21 Jul 2024 23:57:47 UTC No. 16291618
Entropy and Consciousness:
The apparent reduction of energy might be related to entropy, suggesting that consciousness could be an entropy-reducing phenomenon in the universe.
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jul 2024 18:08:37 UTC No. 16292395
>>16284862
The universe is in a never ending state of compressing and inflating.
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jul 2024 19:12:32 UTC No. 16292510
>>16284839
You can shove logic up your ass when talking about the beginning of the Universe. You are like the dog thinking "snacks always come from the bowl, so why I am eating one outside of it? You don't know shit about the snacks, ok?
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 05:39:16 UTC No. 16293098
>>16291615
Where is the beginning of a circle's circumference?
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 05:45:02 UTC No. 16293100
>>16290264
I am not holding empty space with my open hand, it is not possible to grasp anything else with an open hand, I don't see empty space with my own two ears, I see nothing.
>>16290144
0! = 1
>>16290269
No, it still does exist since its the thing that remains when everything else is removed, the smallest possible amount of existence.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 05:46:40 UTC No. 16293103
>>16286168
>>"okay, where did the universe come from?"
>Jesus christ
this
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 05:54:03 UTC No. 16293104
>>16293103
>In the beginning, some dude was already there waiting to turn the lights on.
Super helpful and makes total sense.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 05:54:35 UTC No. 16293105
"nothing" is the absence of anything
"something can't come from nothing" is a rule
a rule is something, not nothing
a state of true nothingness would also be absent of the rule "something can't come from nothing"
or again: nonexistence doesn't exist
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 05:55:37 UTC No. 16293106
>>16293105
forgot picrel
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 05:57:42 UTC No. 16293107
>>16293104
just because it doesn't satisfy your intuition doesn't mean it doesn't satisfy mine
spend a couple years reading Genesis 1 intil it "clicks" for you
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:00:59 UTC No. 16293108
>>16293105
Nope, you forgot about the law of identity, it can't be the absence of itself, so it is the absence of anything else which makes it something itself which means that something must come from nothing since nothing is something itself.
>"something can't come from nothing" is a rule
No, it is a coping mechanism you use to explain why you are so cucked to russian nesting dolls of higher powers you submit to.
>a state of true nothingness would also be absent of the rule "something can't come from nothing"
If your arbitrary "rule" is absent, it means that something could come from nothing.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:03:09 UTC No. 16293109
>>16293107
It doesn't satisfy the definition of beginning, it is not a beginning, it picks up in some random middle part of absolute existence since there was already some dude waiting around. Just like how the big bang doesn't describe the beginning of the universe either, it just goes back to some singularity where the logic they used to develop the big bang theory no longer makes sense.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:11:06 UTC No. 16293111
>>16293109
>the numbers don't begin with the number 1 because there are negative numbers
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:14:07 UTC No. 16293112
>>16293108
Jesus is worth being cucked to
He gave me everything
I'm the foreign egg in His nest that He adopted into His royal family, the branch He grafted into the vine
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:16:54 UTC No. 16293114
>>16293111
Numbers absolutely begin at 0, do you not understand why "negative numbers" exactly mirror positive numbers?
Negative indicates a linear direction with respect to a 0 point.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:17:16 UTC No. 16293115
>>16284839
there never was nothing because what was there in the past was in turn caused by the future; it is part of physics theroies that tachyons, if any, can travel into the past, so that might be the solution
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:20:30 UTC No. 16293118
>>16293112
You can't be cucked to jesus without being cucked to a whole host of other bulls from jews to priests to whoever you trust to translate the book to anyone else who claims to believe in jesus.
You have never met jesus, he didn't give you anything and he certainly didn't make you into a demigod or you wouldn't be so lame and dependent on external sources for your silly ideology.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:25:09 UTC No. 16293126
>>16293118
>atheist #34235 giving me another rant while thinking he has better convincing ability than the Holy Spirit does
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 06:29:34 UTC No. 16293128
>>16293126
Sure thing, time to go destroy your place of worship for using money and cut your family in half with a sword like your magical cult lead said to.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:10:40 UTC No. 16293150
>>16285738
what is the author and title of that book ?
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:16:23 UTC No. 16293155
>>16289120
that 2+2 is 4 and that what isn't false is true are wordings for truths that are dictated by nature (as in natural science that includes e.g. mathematics, not just animals/fauna and plants/flora), and nature isn't someone; you can write 2+2=5 and define the meaning to be what people normally call 2+2=4 and still be right, but that 2+2=5 or anything other than 4 in the same meaning as usual is a universal truth not actually dictated by anyone
B00T at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:17:17 UTC No. 16293159
Fags
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 11:46:19 UTC No. 16293325
>>16293115
>there never was nothing because what was there in the past was in turn caused by the future
So then what is outside of the past, present, and future, if not nothing?
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 11:59:10 UTC No. 16293332
>>16293155
So all the stuff in mathematics and logic is just derived from a few things that we consider self evident right? What if physics works like that, once a theory of everything gets worked out people will be like "god how didn't we realize that!"
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 12:10:54 UTC No. 16293342
>>16293100
If you hit select all and delete on the entirety of existence, there would no longer be ANYTHING. There would be NOTHING left. That's the definition of NOTHING!!!
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 12:14:24 UTC No. 16293346
>>16293342
The root directory would still exist.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 12:30:39 UTC No. 16293360
>>16284839
If that logic is correct, then presumably there has always been something, seeing as there is something
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 15:43:59 UTC No. 16293486
>>16284839
If there is "absolutely nothing" then logic itself doesn't exist. i.e. literally anything can happen, including something from nothing.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 15:45:24 UTC No. 16293491
>>16293100
>am not holding empty space with my open hand, it is not possible to grasp anything else with an open hand, I don't see empty space with my own two ears, I see nothing.
See >>16290297
Trying to imagine nothing is like trying to imagine infinity or a color that doesn't exist. You can't do it. You are getting filtered because your brain can't reach the level of abstraction required to discuss this topic.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 16:34:26 UTC No. 16293560
>>16293491
But MY brain can.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Jul 2024 21:55:54 UTC No. 16293993
>>16293103
Funny how God never creates the waters. Water (the deep) always existed, in the book of Genesis.
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 03:04:49 UTC No. 16294284
>>16293993
the waters are mentioned after it's mentioned that God created the heavens and the earth.
instead of trying to "win", please try to win eternal life.
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 03:15:40 UTC No. 16294291
>>16294284
Then why is it separate from both? A common Why did he have to "separate the waters?"
If you knew ancient mythology, you'd recognize this common creation trope of being from the water.
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 04:41:59 UTC No. 16294350
>>16293332
Even some odd old theory of everything could never possibly account for anything else, and in kind, you can never possibly prevent people from deducing some inferred outside, the only completely logical singular rationalization any individual pitted against the relative vastness of the scale of everything could ever reasonably conclude is "I don't know".
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 04:45:49 UTC No. 16294351
>>16293491
>You can't do it. You are getting filtered
No, you are clearly the one getting filtered since you are rambling on about how you can't imagining properly.
Also, if you were actually organic in nature, you would know that all you have to do to visualize a color that doesn't actually exist is close your eyes and press on your eyelids a bit and you will start seeing all sorts of colors and shapes that don't really exist.
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 14:19:48 UTC No. 16294723
>>16294291
>God created stuff from water
>God seperated the water from the water after He created Heaven and Earth
again, the waters are mentioned after God created.
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 16:41:33 UTC No. 16294888
>>16294351
You can't imagine infinity because you are not infinite. You can't imagine nothing because you are always experiencing something. And no the colors you see when you press on your eyes are all colors you could find on a color wheel, the fact that you didn't understand what I meant supports the idea that your brain can't handle this level of abstraction.
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 23:17:56 UTC No. 16295373
>>16293486
If anything can happen, why not nothing forever?
WORL at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 23:18:46 UTC No. 16295374
>>16295373
Why not somethingg??
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 23:19:50 UTC No. 16295376
>>16284839
literally just to fuck with me
WORL at Wed, 24 Jul 2024 23:21:14 UTC No. 16295378
UNI is symmetrical to nothing, VERSE is the simplest form of something. What you get is a repeating simplicity. 'Nothing' is just a female/male magnetism to a opposite magnet.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 06:10:11 UTC No. 16295690
>>16290144
But 0 = 1 + (-1) = 69420 + (-69420) = inf + (-inf)
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 06:29:39 UTC No. 16295704
>>16295373
Anything couldn't happen in that situation, only nothing could.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:25:23 UTC No. 16295933
>>16284839
The universe only needs to have been "created" or "have existed for eternity" if you accept the axiom that time has always existed. The no-boundary proposal provides an alternative. Before the big bang, there were only spatial dimensions; what we see as time now was "imaginary time" then, which acts like a spatial dimension. If this is the case, the universe was never created, nor has it existed forever, because before the big bang, the universe existed *without time*.
WORL at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:29:07 UTC No. 16295938
>>16295933
What kind of a retard thinks 'it always existed'? I know, for this is the state of the academic hive mind retardation.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:32:55 UTC No. 16295943
>>16295938
Eternal inflation is one hypothesis that gives a reasonable argument for why the universe could have always existed.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:35:06 UTC No. 16295945
>>16295938
Oh, you meant who thinks *time* has always existed, i misread, lol. What I mean specifically is the axiom that time has existed as long as the universe has. The reason that the no-boundary proposal is interesting is that the universe doesn't need to have been created.
WORL at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:35:43 UTC No. 16295946
>>16295943
No it doesn't. Academics like yourself can't spot reasonable arguments. You're just one of the stupid expecting a max sentence hell for your crimes.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:44:15 UTC No. 16295959
>>16295946
Buh? Explain why eternal inflation is stupid. It makes testable predictions, lol.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 13:43:15 UTC No. 16296005
>>16295959
I’m also in the camp of eternal inflation having the best evidence currently. But eternal inflation posits a starting point and not an eternal past.
Generally any theory which posits an eternal past can be instantly discarded because you could not pass an eternal amount of time to get to this point.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 13:55:34 UTC No. 16296009
>>16296005
I'm not sure what you mean?
WORL at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 14:02:00 UTC No. 16296016
>>16296009
Noone knows what these people mean.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 14:55:20 UTC No. 16296053
>>16284839
Context.
"Nothing" by definition literally cannot exist.
It is a challenge for me to explain this, as you cannot really use words to describe it.
An absence of all things is meaningless. You cannot have a 'nothing' that also has rules of any kind.
So if there was once a 'nothing' (boy am I sick of that inherently contradicting language) there would be absolutely no rules/physics it's constrained by.
What do you get from that?
Infinity.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 15:03:27 UTC No. 16296059
>>16296053
>there would be absolutely no rules/physics it's constrained by.
Quite opposite, actually, there would be no rules/physics so absolutely nothing would ever happen
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 15:33:17 UTC No. 16296080
>>16296059
It’s a useless point to argue about because ”nothing” is pure imagination. We might as well discuss how much fire a dragon can produce.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 16:28:12 UTC No. 16296148
>>16296059
What stops infinity from occuring?
;)
WORL at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 16:29:43 UTC No. 16296151
>>16296148
Infinity is TRUMPD by divinity.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 18:09:34 UTC No. 16296254
>>16284839
>what makes you think reality has to be logical?
>only a subset is logical and has patterns we can use to reason and science
>the rest is absurdity beyond belief, wave-particle duality is merely the tip of the iceberg, there'll be more monsters that will trump everything we've seen so far
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 19:59:48 UTC No. 16296392
>>16296151
So true, Vishnu created the universe
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:02:32 UTC No. 16296397
>>16296080
I know, just saying, if there's nothing there's nothing, not even laws that would cause something to happen
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:04:09 UTC No. 16296400
>>16296397
If there's nothing, there's not nothing, there's not 'there's'. This means it's like an opposite magnetism where another magnet can be added either positively or negatively.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:06:31 UTC No. 16296402
>>16296400
Cool it with the schizophrenia, Goldberg, you're going too far off into the deep end
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:06:32 UTC No. 16296404
>>16296400
This as a codic statement is good. If you take the first three phrases as the code of nothing. Implying the second and third phrase are like two ends of a magnet.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:08:20 UTC No. 16296409
>>16296402
Eat shit and die fag.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:15:49 UTC No. 16296430
>>16296409
Sorry to shut down your homosexual scatonecrophiliac fantasies but I'm a straight white male, why would I waste a perfectly good 7 inch dick to be a retarded faggot?
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Jul 2024 06:15:55 UTC No. 16296988
>>16296005
>But eternal inflation posits a starting point and not an eternal past.
No, it posits some potentially eternal singularity whose properties can't completely be recreated from the data of its destructive expansion.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Jul 2024 06:16:55 UTC No. 16296989
>>16296005
>you could not pass an eternal amount of time to get to this point.
Then what is the largest amount of time that can possibly ever pass if you say it can't tend to infinity?
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Jul 2024 06:30:16 UTC No. 16296997
>>16296053
>"Nothing" by definition literally cannot exist.
"Nothing" by definition must exist.
If there wasn't nothing between me and myself, infinite other things would infinitely spew forth and cause my body to explode before it could form, but it doesn't because there is just enough nothing between me and myself to keep my body relatively stabilized and to alert me with its sensational nervous system whenever there is nothing between myself and some other body that could lead the other body to comprise mine in some way.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Jul 2024 06:51:41 UTC No. 16297012
>>16295933
But even under this theory, it can still be said that "there was never a time when existence didn't exist", which is still incomprehensible to us, so it doesn't give us an intuitive understanding of the origin of existence.