A thought experiment.....
One thing we do know is that something happened. Life exists. Existence "is". Stuff began. The Universe is a reality. We exist. Existence exists. The Big Bang "banged".
A thought that always occurred to me when I grew up was this. What if nothing had happened? No existence. No life . No reality. No Bang. Nothing to cause a bang. Unreality. Non-existence.
(At this point in order to really get this you have to let yourself really get into this idea and feel it.)
So instead of Everything - Nothing. The absence of reality. No nothing. Everything just "wasn't". What I imagined was that instead of Existence existing - existence just never got going at all. Infact there would be nothing to "get going" anyway.
What I basically imagined was that instead of everything existing. Nothing existed. A void so completely empty that even to call it a "void" or an "it" would be far to substantial. No space/time , no energy , no nothing.
If you have followed this thought experiment through fully and not just dabbled with it in a distant , intellectual way you will probably be feeling a bit wierd. Then again maybe many of you have had similar thoughts?
Anyway , what this idea left me with was a very strong logical conviction. It seemed self evident to me , considering my "what if" scenario , that if nothing had actually existed (instead of the existence we know) then that would be it for existence. I figured that there could be "no way back" for existence and that actually life (by life I mean EVERYTHING) would be done for. There would have been no reason for any beginning or any Big Bang. It could never get going. Eternal nothingness would have reigned in a void of non-eternity.
This of course lead me to logically conclude that life must have always existed in some form or other. Because if nothingness ever was - we would never be.
Simlarly , if existence was ever obliterated into nothingness (ie a true void of anything) then that would be it also. Life / existence/everything would have sighed it's last breath - never to be redeemed - ever. Life RIP.
This is why I find the idea of saying that the Big Bang is the beginning of everything a bit silly. The reason ? Because unless there is something there it seems illogical to conclude that Life just "gets going" somehow. How does life "get going"? When the logic of this posiiton suggests that if it hadn't "got going" then nothing would have existed.
My feeling is that what happens is the essence of this argument (which is based on logic and a philosophical hypothesis) is side-stepped by some who use physics and maths to say things like "but there was no before" or "nothingness cannot exist without space/time" . To me they have just missed the bigger picture and use wordplay to avoid the obvious logical problem. Life cannot just "begin" to exist. If there ever was nothing there would always be nothing.
No beginning.
Originally posted by knightmeisterThe Big Bang didn't originate from 'nothing.' It originated from a singularity.
A thought experiment.....
One thing we do know is that something happened. Life exists. Existence "is". Stuff began. The Universe is a reality. We exist. Existence exists. The Big Bang "banged".
A thought that always occurred to me when I grew up was this. What if nothing had happened? No existence. No life . No reality. No Bang. Nothing to caus ...[text shortened]... ever was nothing there would always be nothing.
No beginning.
Originally posted by knightmeisterThe logic of your 'self evident' argument eludes me.
A thought experiment.....
One thing we do know is that something happened. Life exists. Existence "is". Stuff began. The Universe is a reality. We exist. Existence exists. The Big Bang "banged".
A thought that always occurred to me when I grew up was this. What if nothing had happened? No existence. No life . No reality. No Bang. Nothing to caus ...[text shortened]... ever was nothing there would always be nothing.
No beginning.
Here's a world. There are some organic molecules. Give it some time, mix in some energy, maybe a bit of structural support from some clay or crystal, and voila - life forms.
Or let me try on your philosophy and go from there. You exist. You were born. Before you were born you didn't exist. Ergo, nothingness, for you. But before you existed, there were other life forms. Hence, nothingness does not - nor need not - lead to nothingness.
Originally posted by amannionI'm not talking about life (as in organic matter ) but Life (as in Life the Universe and Everything). You haven't understand where I am coming from.
The logic of your 'self evident' argument eludes me.
Here's a world. There are some organic molecules. Give it some time, mix in some energy, maybe a bit of structural support from some clay or crystal, and voila - life forms.
Or let me try on your philosophy and go from there. You exist. You were born. Before you were born you didn't exist. Ergo, not ...[text shortened]... ere were other life forms. Hence, nothingness does not - nor need not - lead to nothingness.
Originally posted by knightmeisterI haven't understood where you're coming from either.
I'm not talking about life (as in organic matter ) but Life (as in Life the Universe and Everything). You haven't understand where I am coming from.
The use of life as a term to refer to the entire universe is problematic, but you can use my 'logic' and extend it to the entire universe in much the same way as I used it to refer to life.
It's certainly no worse a use of logic or reasoning than your original attempt.
Originally posted by rwingettAn interesting aside on this (interesting to me, anyway) is that in mystical Jewish theology, “beginning” does not refer to that point before which there was “nothing” (or some nihil “space” somehow separate from God*) but that point “before which nothing is known” (the Zohar).
Don't know. It's possible that the matter that makes up the universe has always existed in some form.
For these rabbis, of course, this “beginning before which nothing is known” is the “beginning before which God began to create”. But, for them, there could not have been some “nothing-something” that had reality vis-à-vis God; God was the only reality, out of which God created the cosmos (I won’t go into the details; but it’s pretty neo-platonic). So, for them, as theologians, there wasn't any "something-stuff" other than God, either. But their acknowledgment of a "beginning before which nothing is known" is also an aknowledgement that they themselves can do no more than speculate about anything before that point; their speculations simply assume the "singularity" (pun intended) of God.
I’m not into “Oh, they knew about the singularity” (although Daniel Matt might go there in his God & the Big bang; I don't recall)—but, that seems to be pretty much what the singularity represents: the point before which nothing is known, because the physical laws of the cosmos as we know them seem to break down.
__________________________________________________
* The philosopher G.E. Moore once made a comment about how people tend to treat “nothing as a queer kind of ‘something’” in order to talk about it: God over here, and some kind of nothing-something over there; or God floating in some kind of “nothing space”.
Originally posted by knightmeisterWow! I really liked that post. Thnx .
A thought experiment.....
One thing we do know is that something happened. Life exists. Existence "is". Stuff began. The Universe is a reality. We exist. Existence exists. The Big Bang "banged".
A thought that always occurred to me when I grew up was this. What if nothing had happened? No existence. No life . No reality. No Bang. Nothing to caus ...[text shortened]... ever was nothing there would always be nothing.
No beginning.
Yes, I feel very weird everyday. Timeslips.
Life is a paradox. (The universe is a paradox,Existence is a para...etc.)
...And thats just scratching the surface. Just getting ready to take off-so to speak. These words are just like Jack Sparrows compass-they show you which way to go. What you desire the most.
Whoah!!-Look!! you left something behind.
Originally posted by amannionI re-read your previous post and could find no access point to make sense of it. I really don't know what you were trying to say.
I haven't understood where you're coming from either.
The use of life as a term to refer to the entire universe is problematic, but you can use my 'logic' and extend it to the entire universe in much the same way as I used it to refer to life.
It's certainly no worse a use of logic or reasoning than your original attempt.
Originally posted by vistesdThere is something about the Jewish relationship with god that strikes me as being far more 'mature' than that of most Christians. Maybe because they don't feel the need to make up answers for everything they don't understand. Or maybe its just because I'm not exposed to Judaism all that much. Not sure which.
An interesting aside on this (interesting to me, anyway) is that in mystical Jewish theology, “beginning” does not refer to that point before which there was “nothing” (or some nihil “space” somehow separate from God*) but that point “before which nothing is known” (the Zohar).
For these rabbis, of course, this “beginning before which nothing is ...[text shortened]... ind of nothing-something over there; or God floating in some kind of “nothing space”.
All the praise to the Lord Above...the almighty creator of all things,
those who can not see the truth its time to turn your lights on and accept the living word.
Step into the truth peoples and stop fooling yourselves with your own temporary opinions.
darkness you chose to live, then darkness you will become.
seek and you shall find, but as far as the current worldy view you carry it is not the reason why you are here.