45
   

How can something come from nothing?

 
 
ripple
 
Reply Tue 18 Dec, 2012 08:00 pm
If something "happened" then something must have made this happen. This something can by definition not be nothing. So how can something come from nothing (for example the creation of the universe)?
 
imans
 
  0  
Reply Tue 18 Dec, 2012 11:27 pm
@ripple,
smthg cant make anything, it is surely else that make things

a source or an absolute source cant b what it can do it is always else

but of course we can reason in terms of objective truth that would exist same but then we would admit that any is true potentially the same of that same objective fact existence

like u for instance, u r free sense as a conscious that is why u cant mean realizin urself, while u would keep meaning smthg else to do that is why it gets to b said by the idea of creations wills, u would rather love to invent smthg that do not exist yet

the problem is what u confuse everything bc cant reason superiority while superiority is the only truth, there is always left as a plus that would b delighted to act as a plus so by doing smthg else

mayb that what also justify lies being objectively existing

so there is superiority which is true dimensions
and there is nothing which is right dimensions so freedom rights

and there is inferiority which is now dimension explorations to end like existin dimension too

superior dimensions mean values
nothing dimensions mean positive reality so right to b constant same
inferior dimensions mean to kill values by possessing positive rights so taking advantage of what do not exist fully objectively to exist fully instead

inferior dimensions sees values as subjective means so never as facts results and of course sees nothing free rights as subjective issues that dont concern it

im just willin to show how any issue is objective it is never about subjects wills

who belong to superior dimension is not someone nice or loving as u invent to think for ur own business abuses

who belong to superior dimension is just someone who enjoy his own freedom from dealin with objective superiority right
the more u could reach to picture a kind of all being else in right ways the more u r meaning the joy to stay there without havin to do anything since no issues to solve when everything is perfect rules, so the more u mean being free will also
the more ur free moves will respect else rights and objective values u can see the more ur wills are true so whatever u do matter really for u

JLNobody
 
  3  
Reply Tue 18 Dec, 2012 11:34 pm
@ripple,
The OP phrase is itself very problematical when one conceives that there are no (some)things and there is no "nothing": both are only concepts. The universe is possibly uncreated (in the sense of coming into existence from nothing), and it may possibly be no more that a change of form from a previous form.
imans
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 04:21 am
@ripple,
and of course smthg can come from nothing, bc nothing is else so free from things

and when superiority is always possible then smthg can b out of nothing but then nothing is always more the else as superiority source while smthg become more the superiority fact relativity to absolute objectivity

there where relative is superior to objective while objective is superiority absolutely

so the essential relation is between superiorities

then existence in a certain perspective is justified from the fact that superiority is never one so superior reality would exist for sure

physically or metaphysically speakin, superiority starts by one move out of nothing but then immediately it becomes else existence accordin to objective superiority concept while the fact that it would recognize itself objectively existing from being constant involves other existence in concept of reality

that is how it is one and all but from the same one perspective

but in truth, one is superiority alone and all is realisation of else superiority

so how objective reality could b less real then individual free conscious

it depends where true superiority is more the reference of the fact



0 Replies
 
Telamon
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 06:48 am
@ripple,
Ignoring imans, I concur with JLNobody (well put!).
Your trying to apply definitions to a perception that’s outside of our current understanding. While fun to do, it’s still all speculation one way or another (when referring to your example for instance).
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 07:43 am
@ripple,
Your thesis assumes that there was "nothing" before your alleged creation. You have no way of knowing that is true. Most commonly, the creationists allege that life cannot come from nothing. Of course, that is nonsense, as there was something there (the chemical components which combined to form organic molecules) before replicating molecules. Essentially, this is the position of the ignorant humans of thousands of years ago, who were facile enough to think that everything must be "made," just as they made tools, weapons, garments, etc. It's the mindset of primitive thinkers, heavily burdened by their ignorance.
0 Replies
 
Ding an Sich
 
  2  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 10:34 am
@ripple,
ripple wrote:

If something "happened" then something must have made this happen. This something can by definition not be nothing. So how can something come from nothing (for example the creation of the universe)?


It has yet to be determined whether or not something did come from nothing.
nothingtodo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 11:51 am
@ripple,
If you are looking for an answer to this, over the last two days you will find I have completely given a possible one. In scientific topics combined with perhaps 2 religious ones.

Please note if you read further, 'event horizon' in some scientific theories, including my own interpretation (as slightly different that it is due to wording and order, perhaps), is a space time warping zone, of possibly non linear value, across assorted axis of universal localisation, IE: matter may not behave as we expect.
0 Replies
 
imans
 
  0  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:14 pm
@ripple,
smthg from nothin confirm that truth is superiority

nothing can b nothing more which from my experience is true, nothing is more then ever usefully existing

but also smthg, so some of a thing, not an absolute thing that cant exist but as reality of different things,
but from nothing bc truth is superiority some of a thing could b right so existing

try to think the idea saying that superiority is always possible

this is the whole jsutification of how existence is anyways always the sense

there are always reasons to answer needs, so needs can b conditionned

there are always reactions to negative condition struggles so negative can b planned for futur incomes of else

but noway u can predict superiority and also noway u can justify it, so it is free then since superiority by definition is always free so it is always possible then it is the truth, what is constantly existing new

nothingtodo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:33 pm
@imans,
Imans,
I find that your frequency of mind has a valid point, to many who seem rarely to respond correctly in line with that spectrum of meaning, when meaning is isolated separately from wording or from 'who' or from external insistence otherwise.

The problem is that, at frequency shifts which exclude by default the notion of innocence, the concept of truth as pertaining to a given realities design becomes flawed.. (at least in terms of 'what is expected of the universe or major parts therein) We therefore replace the word 'truth' with 'ethics, this forces the line of logic in mans mind to witness mans error.

The universal, external from Earth energy or God, or indeed merely youth, has no time for being classed as a truth to those who do not trust in wrath beyond thier own intelligence. You will be raised Earthly slightly with this adaptation.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:49 pm
@ripple,
It seems to me that:


If there is a GOD…then the GOD must have come from nothing…or the GOD always was.

If there is no GOD…then what IS either came from nothing…or always was.

Either way…something can come from nothing or something always has been…and if the Reality is the latter, we are just dealing with manifestations and changes in that something.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 12:50 am
@JLNobody,
The intellectual problem is that the words "come", "create" and "change" all involve a concept of mechanisms operating in time. But time itself is a psychological construct, and there is no way of standing outside "the box" except perhaps by evoking abstruse mathematics involving multi-dimensionality in which lay concepts of "time" are transcended.
imans
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 04:18 am
@nothingtodo,
oohh so u affirm what above god or universal source have time to or not, for wat, only to dare pointin another like me and get ur pleasure by callin us the earth raised by else powers, so u feel superior urself by doin nothing since we are all equal arent we when the source is out same, but wat equality r u meanin to steal when u r considerin urself above ur source out, since u say all its time and still have ur time empty

the principle of equality is killed by the world demonstration and exhibitions show, by two major factors

first lies are proven objectively fully, then if lies exist truth principles for objective existence dont apply anymore, so no more any absolute

second, objective is proven being the minor reason to existence, so then as relative reason it doesnt exist
while it is obvious that subjective reasons are existing since constant beings are for and to working and living
what is subjective is by definition not only else but more it is definitely always thinkin being the most superior to all else, which is the total opposite of equality in substance of the fact that stop to exist






rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 05:49 am
@fresco,
fresco wrote:
But time itself is a psychological construct, and there is no way of standing outside "the box"...
Besides "time" being a psychological construct of human thought, it is also a defined aspect of the physics of this particular Universe, and as such, it has no definition outside of this Universe. And there may not even be something similar outside this Universe, we just don't know.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 06:02 am
@rosborne979,
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 06:33 am
@fresco,
Quote:
The intellectual problem is that the words "come", "create" and "change" all involve a concept of mechanisms operating in time. But time itself is a psychological construct, and there is no way of standing outside "the box" except perhaps by evoking abstruse mathematics involving multi-dimensionality in which lay concepts of "time" are transcended.


This is something you KNOW for certain...or is this part of the dogma of that cult you favor?
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 06:53 am
@Frank Apisa,
Imagine you are in a box Frank which is travelling at a very high speed. An entity outside the box fires a projectile which travels in a straight line from the perspective of outside of the box. You, inside the box, see the entry point and the exit point at different levels as if the projectile is falling from your position.

rap can no doubt explain it better.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 07:57 am
@spendius,
Ummm...ummm...

...okay, I have imagined it.

Now what?

I'm trying to figure out what this has to do with my reply to Fresco.
nothingtodo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 08:51 am
@imans,
"Steal", "feel", "superior".

These three words are not in my agenda or makeup..

In the words of a commander data copy...

'Your fluctuation's prohibit acknowledgement of the truth within this specific situation , Sir.'

Insistence that other peoples posts are selfish, not altruistic and not relevant is not a correct reasoning for the persona you attempt, at extremes of proven validity, yet at the same time, you are tolerable, excepting to those who are under duress of a force of unknown origin, which could be part of themselves they fail to control.

You are either assigned to pop out the troubled or are destined to fall below me, I am in hell, you should know better.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Dec, 2012 09:18 am
@rosborne979,
I think we need to remember that our knowledge of "this universe" is a function of our interaction with it. In that sense, physicists have have coined the term "space-time" to indicate the inseparable nature of those concepts as revealed by our recent interactions (experiments). This means that "time" depends on the observer's reference frame and has no independent status outside of that. (And for Frank's benefit: that is indeed what we know in this case).

Now given our essential functional attachment to what we call "this universe" it may be an oxymoron to talk of "other universes" since we cannot "know" them. We can certainly speculate, (as indeed theists do about "heaven"), but such speculation which scientists might indulge in ( at the mathematical level) is only of significance if it successfully predicts/explains observations in this universe.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » How can something come from nothing?
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/22/2020 at 08:35:03