(May 26, 2013 at 3:06 pm)little_monkey Wrote:(May 26, 2013 at 4:38 am)bennyboy Wrote: I'm only saying that "something from nothing" is an idea that physicalists must avoid like the plague.
That's a cute one. Consider this:
(1) Scientists are proposing that the universe popped out of the vacuum, with evidence that this not only possible but very probable based on what has been observed so far with what the vacuum can do ( Hawking radiation, Casimir force, Higgs boson).
(2) Deists/theists have to invoke a God, (whose nature is problematic) who has created this something out of nothing by using pure magic.
Which is more credible?
Joe
With all due respect, in neither case is something coming out of nothing. A vacuum is still something, as at the least it has some relationship to time and to the existence of the particles that come from it. I don't accept the word "nothing" as a substitute for "particle-spawning space."
As for credibility: I think either view equally abuses the meaning of the word "nothing." I'm fully willing to believe that matter can spontaneously arise out of empty space. But I'm not willing to call this process getting something from nothing.