Mon 23 Apr, 2012 09:02 am
Why does the Universe exist? There are two questions here.
First, why is there a Universe at all? It might have been true
that nothing ever existed: no living beings, no stars, no atoms,
not even space or time. When we think about this possibility,
it can seem astonishing that anything exists. Second, why does
this Universe exist? Things might have been, in countless
ways, different. So why is the Universe as it is?
@TuringEquivalent,
A better question would be "why do you think you know the things you think you know?"
I don't mean you specifically, of course. Why do we think we know the things we think we know?
To play Baseball
If there was no universe there would be no Baseball.
I'd say Basketball as an answer
but it takes air to play Basketball and you didn't ask "Why is there air.".
Rap
@TuringEquivalent,
Or: Why do our experiences of things occur as they do? For example, why do we organize experience in terms of (linear) time and space? What can the non-existence of everything mean to us?* I would like to suggest that the "Universe" appears to us as it does mainly because it is filtered through OUR nature, i.e., our physiology, makes it appear as it does.
*by definition we cannot conceive of
subjects without a world of
objects (i.e., we cannot have perceivers with nothing to perceive).
@raprap,
Don't be silly RapRap. You might have at least suggested "sex". Some peoples have no baseball but they all have sex.
@TuringEquivalent,
TuringEquivalent wrote:
Why does the Universe exist? There are two questions here.
First, why is there a Universe at all? It might have been true
that nothing ever existed: no living beings, no stars, no atoms,
not even space or time. When we think about this possibility,
it can seem astonishing that anything exists. Second, why does
this Universe exist? Things might have been, in countless
ways, different. So why is the Universe as it is?
The short answer is because the subatomic particles enjoy an attraction that lets them coalesce into atoms/molecules/stuff. I thought current cosmology includes the possibility of multverses where possibly that attractive force is nil, and therefore a universe can be empty of atoms/molecules/stuff.
And, the reason there are universes to begin with is because it is what it is. The human brain likes to make up stories, to give meaning to everything, thus, the question that initiated this thread, according to atheistic thinking.
Why does the Universe exist?
Make you ask questions . . .
@TuringEquivalent,
'Why' is an eternal question with eternally no value.
@TuringEquivalent,
Good question! We should write it with Big Letters
My answer is I don't know, Since ever I remember I was here in this universe
with this shape and with thousands of such questions (it is better to call them
surprise instead of question) and unfortunately without any answers.
I found the only thing I can do is contemplating and contemplating and
contemplating...
@Setanta,
Quote:Why does the Universe exist?
Eventually it will be shown that the concept of non-existence entails contradiction and paradox. It exists because it has to, there’s no other way
Then it will also be shown that characteristics such as its constants for instance each has to be what it is because a contrary value would conflict with the others. In relativity for instance the predicted slowing, compression, and gain in mass of a moving clock, intuitively incomprehensible, being an integral part of relativity just have to to be that way else the theory doesn’t hang together. Then of course sure enough they proved to be the case
@JPLosman0711,
Thank you JPL, your support is a welcome breath of quotidian hortatory in this hermeneutic diriment of procrustean miasma
@dalehileman,
Right, however I would switch out where you put 'it' with 'you'.
So then we have: "You exist because you have to, there's no other way."
@Foofie,
Quote:The human brain likes to make up stories, to give meaning to everything, thus, the question that initiated this thread, according to atheistic thinking.
Yes Foof but we had best not abandon the idea that there’s more to the Universe than the simple random bouncing of particles off one another
The argument of the apodictical existential pantheist (my No. 2 Son and I) that (1) It seems the Universe would be a pointless exercise without humanoids to perceive, think about, and enjoy it while (2) the physical constants seem to have been adjusted within a few precent to allow for the evolution of life, is very persuasive and ought also to be addressed
@JPLosman0711,
I've said this before and I'll continue to say it because, apparenly, some peole on this site simply don't get it: by definion,'nothing' does not and cannot exist. If it exists in any way, shape or manner, then it is no longer 'nothing.' It is 'something.'
@Lustig Andrei,
You are the only one who does not 'get it'.
It is by YOUR definition that 'nothing' does not and cannot exist. Of course the definition or 'concept' of 'nothing' cannot exist, it is only a conception.
However, who you really are is no 'thing'(not a thing), somewhere along the lines no 'thing' was turned into a 'thing' called 'nothing'. Your attempts at re-proving an old point which has been attempted over and over again are just clever semantics and you're only spinning yourself in circles.
@JPLosman0711,
I'm not sure what language you're used to speaking, Losman, but in most human languages that I'm familiar with, to say that there is nothing is the same as saying that there is not anything. Hence, nothing exists only as a concept; it can never have concrete reality. It can be expressed mathematically, of course, but in human and concrete terms it is just what its name implies -- nothing,
ergo non-existent.
@Lustig Andrei,
You and I both already know that you can 'understand' me just fine, there's no need to attempt to throw anyone off with the 'what language are you speaking' tangent.
It is also accurate to say that your(as well as my) definition of the word 'nothing' has merely been fabricated and 'formed' through the years, thinking it through to its fundamental basis would prove to be impossible.
So for me to just 'go along' with your definition would only lead us in the wrong direction as your fundamental grounds for assumption were in-accurate.
@TuringEquivalent,
TuringEquivalent wrote:
Why does the Universe exist? There are two questions here.
First, why is there a Universe at all? It might have been true
that nothing ever existed: no living beings, no stars, no atoms,
not even space or time. When we think about this possibility,
it can seem astonishing that anything exists. Second, why does
this Universe exist? Things might have been, in countless
ways, different. So why is the Universe as it is?
Answer to question 1:
Everything is necessarily contingent (principle of unreason). If this is the case, then there must exist one thing no matter what, albeit a contingent thing. Hence, you cannot have nothing.
Answer to question 2:
There is no reason why the universe exist as it does; this is drawn from the principle of unreason, which runs contrary to the principle of sufficient reason, wherein one attempts to proceed from the totality of the world (or universe) to a necessary being.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace