Causality

[seer]

And tell me why such a scenario is not a perfectly reasonably possibility? It does not depend on an infiinite chain of causality, because the expanse is itself infinite and uncaused. It is also not conscious, and the generation of "universes" is a perfectly common event in the "something." That our particular universe is structured/ordered is perfectly reasonable in the context of "an infinity of universes."

Thoughts?

Every once in a while, the random flow of this (something) randomly spawns a singularity, which drops out of the expanse into its own dimension, explodes, and expands until it experiences heat death in that dimension.

What caused this random event that spawned the singularity, and what caused the event that caused the singularity. I think with physical events you won't be able to avoid an infinite chain of causality. Unless you give up the idea of cause and effect.

[Sparko]

...which creates the infinite regress problem, of course.

10 Create Universe
20 Goto 10

Blame Microsoft.

[carpedm9587]

Every once in a while, the random flow of this (something) randomly spawns a singularity, which drops out of the expanse into its own dimension, explodes, and expands until it experiences heat death in that dimension.

What caused this random event that spawned the singularity, and what caused the event that caused the singularity. I think with physical events you won't be able to avoid an infinite chain of causality.

The cause of the singularity is the "stuff" of the expanse. Think of it as analogous to an ocean, but one where the water is in constant motion not due to wind or heat, but due to the relationship between the molecules of water themselves, which are in constant, random motion due to some combination of attractive/repellent forces. In other words, it is the very nature of this stuff to "move." That random motion creates areas of higher and lower pressure that occur randomly throughout the expanse. Just as the motion of water can create a "rogue wave" - the motion of this "stuff" can create a singularity now and again.

[carpedm9587]

10 Create Universe
20 Goto 10

Blame Microsoft.

A BASIC programmer... I love it.

[Sparko]

The cause of the singularity is the "stuff" of the expanse. Think of it as analogous to an ocean, but one where the water is in constant motion not due to wind or heat, but due to the relationship between the molecules of water themselves, which are in constant, random motion due to some combination of attractive/repellent forces. In other words, it is the very nature of this stuff to "move." That random motion creates areas of higher and lower pressure that occur randomly throughout the expanse. Just as the motion of water can create a "rogue wave" - the motion of this "stuff" can create a singularity now and again.

That's not far off from brane theory.

[carpedm9587]

That's not far off from brane theory.

It was what gave me the idea to propose the thought experiment...

[seer]

The cause of the singularity is the "stuff" of the expanse. Think of it as analogous to an ocean, but one where the water is in constant motion not due to wind or heat, but due to the relationship between the molecules of water themselves, which are in constant, random motion due to some combination of attractive/repellent forces. In other words, it is the very nature of this stuff to "move." That random motion creates areas of higher and lower pressure that occur randomly throughout the expanse. Just as the motion of water can create a "rogue wave" - the motion of this "stuff" can create a singularity now and again.

But Carp, even with random events there are causes. Even with the ocean example. You can not have an event without a cause. If you look at your rogue wave you will find a series of past events leading up to it, slight change here, there, etc... and if the process was eternal into the past there would be an infinite number of past events leading up to it, even if the system was self-contained. They only way around this is to deny cause and effect.

[Sparko]

But Carp, even with random events there are causes. Even with the ocean example. You can not have an event without a cause. If you look at your rogue wave you will find a series of past events leading up to it, slight change here, there, etc... and if the process was eternal into the past there would be an infinite number of past events leading up to it, even if the system was self-contained. They only way around this is to deny cause and effect.

Good point.

[carpedm9587]

But Carp, even with random events there are causes. Even with the ocean example. You can not have an event without a cause. If you look at your rogue wave you will find a series of past events leading up to it, slight change here, there, etc... and if the process was eternal into the past there would be an infinite number of past events leading up to it, even if the system was self-contained. They only way around this is to deny cause and effect.

Again, the cause lies in the nature of the "soup." There is no outside agency. Because of this random motion, the "stuff" would show areas of differing density. The rogue wave was to provide an analogy for how the "stuff," could randomly show areas of such high density as to spawn a singularity. As I noted, all analogies will fail at some point because we are limited to using words/concepts from our universe to talk about a hypothetical that is not. This "stuff" is the "perpetual engine" of existence - constantly ebbing and flowing - randomly (and infinitely) spitting out singularities.

Indeed - it's simply god without the sentience.

[seer]

Again, the cause lies in the nature of the "soup." There is no outside agency. Because of this random motion, the "stuff" would show areas of differing density. The rogue wave was to provide an analogy for how the "stuff," could randomly show areas of such high density as to spawn a singularity. As I noted, all analogies will fail at some point because we are limited to using words/concepts from our universe to talk about a hypothetical that is not. This "stuff" is the "perpetual engine" of existence - constantly ebbing and flowing - randomly (and infinitely) spitting out singularities.

Indeed - it's simply god without the sentience.

Carp, it still does not work, even if the soup is self-contained like the ocean. You will have to abandon cause and effect. Look at this this way:

Your soup kicks out a singularity, but something in the soup caused this event, a change. But that change was not there before because it did not kick out that particular singularity before that moment, therefore the change itself needed to come into being before it could cause singularity and something had to cause the change, and so on into eternity past. You can not escape an infinite series of causes and effects unless you deny cause and effect.

BTW - God is not a series of events.

[carpedm9587]

Carp, it still does not work, even if the soup is self-contained like the ocean. You will have to abandon cause and effect. Look at this this way:

Your soup kicks out a singularity, but something in the soup caused this event, a change. But that change was not there before because it did not kick out that particular singularity before that moment, therefore the change itself needed to come into being before it could cause singularity and something had to cause the change, and so on into eternity past. You can not escape an infinite series of causes and effects unless you deny cause and effect.

BTW - God is not a series of events.

Cause and effect is something we perceive in our universe at our quantum level. We don't know if "cause/effect" applies in the same way outside our universe. But you are right that we will always be locked into using "intra-universe" concepts and terms because this is the only reality we know, so the thought experiment is probably a lost cause. We don't know if, outside our universe, these principles even apply.

As for what god is or isn't, I leave that to religions. There are many notions and each has its own "spin" on what the nature of this being is, and all I have encountered eventually run into contradictions. I did not, however, seek to imply that god was a "series of events." I suggested that the thought experiment really boils down to "god without the sentience." Simply an existent force randomly churning out universes - always existent - infinite in every "measurable" (whatever that means in this context) dimension.

[seer]

Cause and effect is something we perceive in our universe at our quantum level. We don't know if "cause/effect" applies in the same way outside our universe. But you are right that we will always be locked into using "intra-universe" concepts and terms because this is the only reality we know, so the thought experiment is probably a lost cause. We don't know if, outside our universe, these principles even apply.

Seems to me that if you have effects without a cause we may as well just call those miracles...

[JimL]

And if this 'expanse' happens to be sentient but always was and always will be, and it forms these singularities because it wants to and decides to take interest in some of them ... why wouldn't this not also be perfectly reasonable idea?

Jim

Well then the sentient expanse would be material and the things it forms would be parts of itself. Pantheism.

[JimL]

People can come up with any number of imaginary scenarios, Carpe. Just because an idea is plausible doesn't make it so. Just because you can imagine it doesn't make it real. Isn't that why you don't believe that "God did it?"

Yes, exactly, but the self existing, infinite, and evolving world makes sense, a god that creates one out of nothing, doesn't.

[Sparko]

Yes, exactly, but the self existing, infinite, and evolving world makes sense, a god that creates one out of nothing, doesn't.

To you. To me, it is the opposite.