What came first, Nothing or Something?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: OOOOOO

OOOOO: You say that, but it does. It's all included. Plus it would seem impossible to take the Nothing out of the Equation.

MotherMayEye: Wait...a 'mind' cannot exist in 'Nothing' which does not exist in Space or Time. It's just an idea, not a materialization.
Minds only exist in Something because they are Something.

This would be a great question to put before your *God Aspect* if you believe there is such a creator existing.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: OOOOOO

OOOOO: You say that, but it does. It's all included. Plus it would seem impossible to take the Nothing out of the Equation.

MotherMayEye: Wait...a 'mind' cannot exist in 'Nothing' which does not exist in Space or Time. It's just an idea, not a materialization.
Minds only exist in Something because they are Something.

This would be a great question to put before your *God Aspect* if you believe there is such a creator existing.

Me? I'm an atheist.

What do you mean?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: OOOOOO

OOOOO: You say that, but it does. It's all included. Plus it would seem impossible to take the Nothing out of the Equation.

MotherMayEye: Wait...a 'mind' cannot exist in 'Nothing' which does not exist in Space or Time. It's just an idea, not a materialization.
Minds only exist in Something because they are Something.

This would be a great question to put before your *God Aspect* if you believe there is such a creator existing.

Me? I'm an atheist.

What do you mean?

I see.... So that is why you wont Accept or argue that nothingness as a absolute empty infinite Space and time exists.

I know you accept that light travels at c in a vacuum. But its like you wont Accept the vacuum is actually the void which gives light the constant speed c. I Guess it is because at School we are instructed to focus on the light and not so much in what void something is tested in.

originally posted by: spy66

I see.... So that is why you wont Accept or argue that nothingness as a absolute empty infinite Space and time exists.

I know you accept that light travels at c in a vacuum. But its like you wont Accept the vacuum is actually the void which gives light the constant speed c. I Guess it is because at School we are instructed to focus on the light and not so much in what void something is tested in.

You must have me confused with another ATSer. We never discussed these ideas.

What came first nothing or something. mind=blown

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: OOOOOO

OOOOO: You say that, but it does. It's all included. Plus it would seem impossible to take the Nothing out of the Equation.

MotherMayEye: Wait...a 'mind' cannot exist in 'Nothing' which does not exist in Space or Time. It's just an idea, not a materialization.
Minds only exist in Something because they are Something.

This would be a great question to put before your *God Aspect* if you believe there is such a creator existing.

Me? I'm an atheist.
What do you mean?

It isn't what "I" mean at all with regards to a creator anymore; as you as an atheist think yourself to be an 'accident' or a product of some other undefined system/beyond the control of an intelligent force. Regardless of perspective; both are miracles of creation.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: OOOOOO

OOOOO: You say that, but it does. It's all included. Plus it would seem impossible to take the Nothing out of the Equation.

MotherMayEye: Wait...a 'mind' cannot exist in 'Nothing' which does not exist in Space or Time. It's just an idea, not a materialization.
Minds only exist in Something because they are Something.

This would be a great question to put before your *God Aspect* if you believe there is such a creator existing.

Me? I'm an atheist.
What do you mean?

It isn't what "I" mean at all with regards to a creator anymore; as you as an atheist think yourself to be an 'accident' or a product of some other undefined system/beyond the control of an intelligent force. Regardless of perspective; both are miracles of creation.

No matter how random something happeneds it can always be explained sceintifically at some point when the knowlege catches up.

A random event can also be looked upon as miracles, because a random event would not have taken Place unless specific events take Place at a specific time line....... There must be a Source related to what ever momentum that exists for even randomness to happen.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Disagree, the system is defined. It's intelligent inherently -- it's a mathematical process set into motion for the purpose of causing an Idea of Nothing to coexist in the dimension and fabric of Time with the Idea of Something.

That's my take.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
It isn't what "I" mean at all with regards to a creator anymore; as you as an atheist think yourself to be an 'accident' or a product of some other undefined system/beyond the control of an intelligent force. Regardless of perspective; both are miracles of creation.

Also, I think most people are missing the obvious. Ideas born in Minds, do not spontaneously cause new ideas to exist in Space. Ideas born in Minds simply exist in the fabric of the dimension of Time. For example, the Idea of Nothing.

We can create from our Ideas, but we borrow from other ideas that were pre-existing.

On the other hand, Ideas that cannot have been born in Minds spontaneously materialize and cause new Ideas to materialize spontaneously. For example, the Idea of Something.

In other words, the first particle spontaneously appeared. It's qualities were unique and only definable by other Ideas. This caused new Ideas to spontaneously materialize.

Another example would be human reproduction. A sperm and an egg collide. The Ideas within the Sperm and the Egg, upon collision, cause other new ideas to become possible, but at least one Idea must manifest itself.

The sperm could collide and slide around the egg. Or it can combine with the egg and produce new life combining a broad spectrum of qualities from both the egg and the sperm. Thanks to DNA, those possibilities are numerous.

So the chance that a new life will at least try to begin and the cells will multiply are much greater than no new life at all.

The probabilities are so highly in favor of producing Life with Minds because Something was all set in Motion so that the Idea of Nothing could exist in Time, thanks to intelligent Minds -- like ours.

If the Idea of Nothing did not exist in the fabric of the dimension of Time, then the Idea of Something could never exist. But it existed as soon as the first particle materialized in Space AND TIME.

So the obvious but easily missed is that Ideas have dual natures -- they materialize in Space and Time. Or they Just exist in Time thanks to Minds.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Disagree, the system is defined. It's intelligent inherently -- it's a mathematical process set into motion for the purpose of causing an Idea of Nothing to coexist in the dimension and fabric of Time with the Idea of Something.

That's my take.

Math only explaines to us how the system Works. It does not tell you have it came to be.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

In other words, the first particle spontaneously appeared. It's qualities were unique and only definable by other Ideas. This caused new Ideas to spontaneously materialize.

Nothing randomly or appear spontaneously all by it self. There sure is nothing Scientific about such a reasoning.

That sounds more like a miracle.


What would you Call that frabric of Space and time in which that particle spontaneously appeared in?
Until that particle appeared there was only the fabric of Space and time "nothingness".

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Disagree, the system is defined. It's intelligent inherently -- it's a mathematical process set into motion for the purpose of causing an Idea of Nothing to coexist in the dimension and fabric of Time with the Idea of Something.

That's my take.

Math only explaines to us how the system Works. It does not tell you have it came to be.

Yes it does. I explained in the comment following this one.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

There is no such thing as nothing... that is to say that the value Zero is simply a mathematical construct and is a state that cannot exist in nature.

In the universe if you were to add up all the matter and energy you would get the value zero..... in other-words the universe actually cost nothing to produce...

A bit like having two accountancy books... one that when added up equals 238762034602 and the other book that equals -238762034602

The end result is zero...

So your answer is something always exists, has existed and will exist simultaneously ad infinitum.

Korg.

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: MotherMayEye

In other words, the first particle spontaneously appeared. It's qualities were unique and only definable by other Ideas. This caused new Ideas to spontaneously materialize.

Nothing randomly or appear spontaneously all by it self. There sure is nothing Scientific about such a reasoning.

That sounds more like a miracle.


What would you Call that frabric of Space and time in which that particle spontaneously appeared in?
Until that particle appeared there was only the fabric of Space and time "nothingness".

It only sounds like a miracle because our Ideas do not spontaneously materialize.

But our Minds evolved solely to allow Ideas to exist in Time only.

'Something' could be anything. And we see evidence all around us of new unique IDEAS spontaneously materializing. Like a unique child.

The IDEA of that child spontaneously materialized with NO MIND thinking of it first.

We are made to have Ideas that do not spontaneously materialize...in that sense Ideas in the Mind are the anomaly.

But we don't realize it. That's not how we understand Ideas to work.

The evidence is everywhere -- Ideas do spontaneously materialize outside of Minds.

originally posted by: Korg Trinity
a reply to: MotherMayEye

There is no such thing as nothing... that is to say that the value Zero is simply a mathematical construct and is a state that cannot exist in nature.

Korg.

True. But the IDEA of Nothing exists. It had to exist for Something to exist. Because as soon as Something existed, so did the IDEA of Something.

But the Idea of Something and the Idea of Nothing have to coexist.

I am talking only about Ideas.

The Idea of Something exists in Space and Time. But the Idea of Nothing can only exist in Time -- because it cannot materialize...it's Nothing.

It's only represented by an Idea.

Both the Mayans and the Babylonians, around 200-300 BC, independently came up with the mathematical concept of zero. They knew when they had nothing, but had no mathematical expression for it. The concept of nothing was not new. Whether it had been applied on a universal scale is unknown. Both societies were brilliant astrologers. Was the sum zero somehow necessary in their view of the universe?

I understand the concept of nothing. But nothing changed into something. Change requires a few things. It needs something to change, and a catalyst to make that change happen. If either of those existed, there never was 'nothing'. Without them, there could be no change. There could never be 'nothing'. So there was something. What was it, where did it come from, and when did it get here?

Its only 9 AM and I need a beer...

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
I understand the concept of nothing. But nothing changed into something. Change requires a few things. It needs something to change, and a catalyst to make that change happen. If either of those existed, there never was 'nothing'. Without them, there could be no change. There could never be 'nothing'. So there was something. What was it, where did it come from, and when did it get here?

Its only 9 AM and I need a beer...

Nothing cannot change. It cannot produce an Idea of itself. Something caused the Idea of Nothing to exist in Minds that could perceive Something and therefore perceive the Idea of Something. Then those Minds created the Idea of Nothing by comparison -- like Math as you said.

And that brought the Idea of Nothing into co-existence with the Idea of Something in the fabric of the dimension of Time.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: MotherMayEye

In other words, the first particle spontaneously appeared. It's qualities were unique and only definable by other Ideas. This caused new Ideas to spontaneously materialize.

Nothing randomly or appear spontaneously all by it self. There sure is nothing Scientific about such a reasoning.

That sounds more like a miracle.


What would you Call that frabric of Space and time in which that particle spontaneously appeared in?
Until that particle appeared there was only the fabric of Space and time "nothingness".

It only sounds like a miracle because our Ideas do not spontaneously materialize.

But our Minds evolved only to allow Ideas to exist in Time only.

'Something' could be anything. And we see evidence all around us of new unique IDEAS spontaneously materializing. Like a unique child.

The IDEA of that child spontaneously materialized with NO MIND thinking of it first.

We are made to have Ideas that do not spontaneously materialize...in that sense Ideas in the Mind are the anomaly.

But we don't realize it. That's not how we understand Ideas to work.

The evidence is everywhere -- Ideas do spontaneously materialize outside of Minds.

You are using a form of reasoning that i have to admit that i have not thought much about.

We all have a mind of Our own, and no minds are really alike.......

But i do have a issue With something spontaneously coming into existence. Because it does imply that there exists a Source that makes that possible. A Source unknown to us.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Korg Trinity
a reply to: MotherMayEye

There is no such thing as nothing... that is to say that the value Zero is simply a mathematical construct and is a state that cannot exist in nature.

Korg.

True. But the IDEA of Nothing exists. It had to exist for Something to exist. Because as soon as Something existed, so did the IDEA of Something.

Not true.

Assuming (an assumption I disagree with) we are the first sentient life to contemplate reality, the universe existed for 13.2 billion years before we existed to have any idea about what existence is.

originally posted by: spy66

You are using a form of reasoning that i have to admit that i have not thought much about.

We all have a mind of Our own, and no minds are really alike.......

But i do have a issue With something spontaneously coming into existence. Because it does imply that there exists a Source that makes that possible. A Source unknown to us.

But Something does exist. The planets and stars -- Everything. That's how the Idea of Something functions. It materializes to manifest itself as an Idea. Something can be anything and work in many ways. But it is limited in that it had to produce the Idea of Nothing.

The recipe: Space, Time, Matter, Energy, and Minds to perceive it all to create the Idea of Nothing.

Something could not exist and become an Idea if the Idea of nothing did not exist with it.

So the fabric of Time is unbroken and within the first particle (or whatever) was the certain 'destiny' of the Idea of Nothing -- thanks to a mathematical process.

It's a new line of reasoning for me, too. And I have been thinking that using this reasoning -- all that we are in terms of thoughts, ideas, personality exists in Time forever. We are only living in Space AND Time temporarily -- long enough to perceive Something and have ideas based on those perceptions. So when we cease to exist in Space because Energy has separated from our bodies, it causes a new Idea to manifest -- one where we exist solely in Time. And Our Time bodies -- a collection of Ideas and thoughts -- cannot unlearn how to think and have Ideas. We just don't have new Ideas in Time based on new perceptions of Space. But the memories of Space still exist in Time, so perhaps we go on having new thoughts and Ideas based on memories.

Much like dreams.