Nothing From Something

When you read many Science vs. Religion debates, one of the inevitable roadblocks seems to be the argument that something cannot originate from nothing. Whether you believe the Big Bang was responsible for the onset of the creation of all life or a deity such as God, a common refutation from the opposing side will be that "you can't create something from nothing". This usually results in an unresolved, heated debate that seems to proceed in a circular fashion.

But maybe that is our key mistake, our major roadblock to discovering the truth: nothing cannot exist. What if infinite matter has always existed and only began to create/evolve/develop at a certain moment in time when it become aware of its nature?

Maybe it's time for us to stop thinking that in the beginning there was nothing, when really there was just infinite matter that was not yet self-aware.

If we are to accept this theory, then I suppose the next question becomes: how/when was this infinite matter made self-aware? I do not know the answer to that question, but I am sure some of the great minds on this website could come up with some smart creative answers!

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Some questions aren't answerable by finite cranial capacity. I've never understood why this bothers humans so much.

I answered this in a thread I crested called " The Birth of the Creator " . Sorry I cannot post a link to it beacuse I am on my phone at the moment. a reply to: Dark Ghost

Oh look I think I did it..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

-Alien

a reply to: Dark Ghost

The way I've always understood it, before the big bang there was something. A singularity, all the matter in the universe compressed down to a single point. What caused this singularity to explode, what caused the singularity, did the matter implode to a singularity, what was before the singularity, these are all questions that do not currently have an answer.

This is based of off the information humanity has managed to obtain in its short lifetime, so whether or not its the exact truth or completely wrong is definitely up for debate. That said, it is an explanation based on data and is the closest answer we are capable at this time.

There are a never ending list of questions we can ask, and every answer just leads to more questions. This is why i feel religion should not be involved in the scientific search for answers. Religion already has all the answers they need, science will never have all the answers.

I don't mean to come off as anti-religion. I think its fine and dandy for a person to have their own personal belief system and their own perspective on the world, the universe and beyond. I might even go so far as to say it's healthy. What I am against is when those personal beliefs stand in the way of scientific progress. There should be no need for religion to stifle scientific progress, because if any of it is true, science and religion will eventually coalesce. The only reason to try and stifle scientific progress is if they fear the findings. Good or bad, knowledge is something we should always fight and strive for.

DC

originally posted by: xDeadcowx

I don't mean to come off as anti-religion. I think its fine and dandy for a person to have their own personal belief system and their own perspective on the world, the universe and beyond. I might even go so far as to say it's healthy. What I am against is when those personal beliefs stand in the way of scientific progress. There should be no need for religion to stifle scientific progress, because if any of it is true, science and religion will eventually coalesce. The only reason to try and stifle scientific progress is if they fear the findings.

The inverse is also true:

I don't mean to come off as anti-science. I think it's fine and dandy for a person to adopt a positivist perspective on the world, the universe and beyond. I might even go so far as to say it's healthy (in some applications). What I am against is when that philosophy stands in the way of spiritual development. There should be no reason for science to stifle spiritual development, because if any of it is true, religion and science will eventually coalesce. The only reason to try and stifle spiritual development is for fear of what may be found.

The Big Bang is a term to describe a point in time when the universe began expanding from a single concentration of energy. What was happening before that is unknown. If there was previously a great, expanded universe like ours that for some reason collapsed entirely on itself to the size of the singularity, and then exploded again to form our current universe, we could never know. We could never know the order of matter in whatever universe was before the 'big bang' because everything was crunched down in the singularity, destroying any traces of the way it was before. There isn't any way to see the conditions that created the singularity. There isn't any way to know how long the singularity existed before the Big Bang was triggered.

We didn't come from nothing. We just don't know what existed before the Big Bang, and will likely never know.

originally posted by: signalfire
a reply to: Dark Ghost

Some questions aren't answerable by finite cranial capacity. I've never understood why this bothers humans so much.

But then some are. More than some people realize.

a reply to: NthOther

That door does not swing both ways. If asking questions and looking for answers gets in the way of your spiritual development, then your spiritual development is wrong.

You are entitled to your own views, opinions, beliefs, but not your own facts. Facts are facts and if they contradict your beliefs, then it's time to modify those beliefs.

originally posted by: xDeadcowx

That door does not swing both ways. If asking questions and looking for answers gets in the way of your spiritual development, then your spiritual development is wrong.

Re-read my post.

You are entitled to your own views, opinions, beliefs, but not your own facts. Facts are facts and if they contradict your beliefs, then it's time to modify those beliefs.

Facts are things someone else told you, and you believed.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Is it really the case that any belief system proclaims the generation of something out of nothing? The Bible does not say God made the world out of nothing, merely that He shaped it out of material that already existed 'without form'. I don't know of any creation myth — not even in the Vedas — that claims the universe emerged from nothing.

And modern science holds that the universe emerged from a singularity which already contained all the matter and energy we see around us.

I have heard creationists accuse evolutionists of believing that 'something came from nothing', but that's about the only instance I can think of.

Someone said emerge ?

a reply to: Astyanax

Then you probably haven't looked much into this topic.

Religion has trouble explaining God's origin.

Science has trouble explaining what caused the Big Bang.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Have a read of A Universe from Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.

Krauss is philosophically clumsy and has a bit of an ego, but the theory that what we think of as 'nothing' is actually sort of something is very interesting. Based on his thoughts, the creation of 'something' is made procedural and inevitable by the laws of physics.

It also looks past the idea that all matter and energy was once held in an infinite space. Worth reading even if persons don't like Krauss.

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
a reply to: Astyanax

Then you probably haven't looked much into this topic.

Religion has trouble explaining God's origin.

This is true.

Science has trouble explaining what caused the Big Bang.

Technically this is true, but what does this have to do with something coming from nothing? Like has been mentioned by just about every poster in the thread, the universe, pre-big bang, was a singularity and wasn't nothing (it was everything) so there is no something coming from nothing here.

What we are basically talking about is a tiny fraction of mass breaking through the Higgs field that created this thread topic... It only makes sense to me that more of this mass is created somewhere else parallel to our ball of mass.… with many more worlds that look and behave just like this thread.

So what happens is "Nothing" gets tired of being lonely, and then behaves like a hermaphrodite to create something.. as in producing quantum sperm... I mean foam!

.... and then bang here we are R = 0 to R = R0.... This would mean we are apart of nothing!!!

so it's no big deal about where we come from, it's "nothing" to worry about.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

We would have to stop assuming that nothing/zero means void. Zero/nothing is everything(infinity) just not actualized. This universe is always nothing, infinite patterns of nothing. Zero is a balance point between positive and negative infinity. Since zero's flip side is infinity divide by zero/infinity you have another zero/infinity. Since zero is also infinity it loses nothing by being divided It's mathematical and mental. The Universe is a living mental mathematical process it evolves through a simple dialect of thesis, antithesis , synthesis(and repeat) to increase in complexity. It starts unconscious and evolves to consciousness. Zero/nothing/Unconscious/potential = Infinity/everything/conscious/actualization.

A pattern we show ourselves as children. An 1 year old can unconsciously do something like walking and learn that fairly easily and naturally but explained objectively with mathematics this would be incredibly complex. So I think the early universe(Remember my position is everything is mental) by a simple primitive like thought did on the flip side of that primitive thought something very mathematically complex. Something necessary to understand how complex and infinite it is. Which we are living showing and understanding at this instant. I think two domains are needed for this process but I'm not going into that(The Fourier transform can reconcile these two domains).

Existence and non existence rationally can not coincide. Why do we not see things fall in to non existence all the time? There is no non existence IMO.