There has always been something existing: yes, no?

[Jedidiah]

In what way does the quantum world exist Jed . . . I've read about it but even know I can't remember anyone describing it in a way that could make sense to me. I just remember that on that small of a level the rules of the macro-world don't work.

My understanding of how quantum physics works is small. I won't pretend otherwise. It is however a part of the creation (or universe if you prefer) not some magical self existent power outside time and space.

[Jedidiah]

"Nothing," as in the absence of any thing, is metaphysically impossible. This is because:

1) "Nothing" has no properties, and something with no properties is incoherent. Even the empty set has the property of being a set, but nothing lacks all meaningful descriptors.

2) "Nothing" is synonymous with nonexistence itself, and it is true via the law of identity that nonexistence cannot exist.

Therefore, because nothing is metaphysically impossible, it follows that something has always existed. I don't claim to know what that "something" was, but I tend to think it was an eternal* (either by atemporality, non-linear time [assuming the B-theory is true], or infinite regression) universe / multiverse of some sort. I feel the concept of gods is incoherent for reasons which I'll save for another post.

Side note: even if "nothing" was metaphysically possible, it would still be impossible for something to come from nothing. This is because nothing has no properties, so therefore whatever it produced would also lack properties.

Bologna, no matter how thin you slice it.

[gerry]

Gerry

Sorry, but it has been demonstrated repeatedly that talking with you is a waste of time. I'll chat with the other nice folk here.

Well, you can leave at your earliest convenience from this thread of mine, and good riddance.


Anyway, I see it very clearly that you are an escape artist trying hard to sound subtle, baloney!



Sometimes harsh words are in order on the probability that if a person does do writing then there is possibility that he can be a non-idiot.


So, Pancreas, do get out of this thread or start being a non-idiot escape artist.




Gerry

[gerry]

The topic of this thread is the question:

There has always been something existing: yes, no?

So, todate the drift with atheists who are reacting to the topic is that they atheists bring up quantum-ism in order to avoid at least just avoid answering the question, if not answering it in the negative, thus:

No, there has not always been something existing.

Atheists who take to the tack that owing to their quantum-ism they do not know and/or even cannot know as to answer the topic question, I guess it is pointless for them to be here in this thread.

Now for atheists who answer no, I invite them to explain how they did come to be existing as to be present and participating in this forum.



Gerry

[gerry]

Now I like to engage everyone here with my insight that anyone making a statement must have a question to which his statement is an answer.

We have here, folks, two statements from two posters:

...if "nothing" was metaphysically possible, it would still be impossible for something to come from nothing.
Haven #9.

Actually, nothing is not a metaphysical impossibility.
Chrawnus #10

How do they or what questions are these two gentlemen answering with their statements about the metaphysical possibility or impossibility of the existence of nothing?


I am inviting them to work on the questions their statements are answers to.




Gerry

[nightbringer]

"The quantum world works in mysterious ways."

[Xru]

Actually, nothing is not a metaphysical impossibility. You seem to handle "nothing" as some sort of object/item/thing/concept without properties, when in reality, nothing is simply the absense of every object/item/thing/concept what so ever and not a thing in itself. Treating "nothing" as some sort of object like you're doing here is simply misguided.

You sound like Kant . . God help us.

[Xru]

Gerry

Sorry, but it has been demonstrated repeatedly that talking with you is a waste of time. I'll chat with the other nice folk here.

hmmmmm . . . me thinks that here is a history worth exploring

[Xru]

Well, you can leave at your earliest convenience from this thread of mine, and good riddance.


Anyway, I see it very clearly that you are an escape artist trying hard to sound subtle, baloney!



Sometimes harsh words are in order on the probability that if a person does do writing then there is possibility that he can be a non-idiot.


So, Pancreas, do get out of this thread or start being a non-idiot escape artist.




Gerry

Nice .. . . I always enjoy the symmetry of reciprocal insults.

[Chrawnus]

You sound like Kant . . God help us.

How exactly do I sound like Kant?

[Leonhard]

There has always been something existing: yes, no?

There has never been a time where there was nothing, so yes, something has always existed.

[pancreasman]

There has never been a time where there was nothing, so yes, something has always existed.

he he he he. You're hoping that will slip by him, aren't you?

[showmeproof]

This is the background of the present thread:

[ I had been absent for all the days that when I tried to open this forum the message, "500 Internal Server Error," would flash on my monitor. But when I had to stay in another place just some days last week, I was able to have started this thread and saw it come out; however, immediately when I looked again, there was that error message again. And today I do not see that new thread at all in this forum, that is why I am starting it again. ]

So, what are you waiting for? Oh ye atheists here and everywhere who chance to see this thread?

Answer the question:

There has always been something existing: yes, no?

Gerry

We truly don't know. Many ideas, but nothing is certain at this point.

[showmeproof]

There has never been a time where there was nothing, so yes, something has always existed.

Time being the operative dimension in question.

[shunyadragon]

he he he he. You're hoping that will slip by him, aren't you?

I consider it a good response.