(June 8, 2014 at 2:48 am)bennyboy Wrote: For any given framework, you have at least two possibilities: it is part of another framework, or it is not. If it is, then you ask why that super-framework exists, etc.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here exactly. Frameworks exist to describe something, they're not out there. We just hope that they accurately describe what is out there. So it doesn't make sense here to ask why the framework itself exists.
Quote:Gravity is clearly part of a framework-- it is just one of the features of our universe. Therefore, the idea that gravity allowed the universe to create itself is just a different form of circle.
Oh so by "framework" you meant a feature of something, not our description of reality?
Quote:In my opinion, the only really sensible answer to cosmogony is to run naked down the street in the middle of the night, pulling your hair out in clumps and shrieking "It doesn't fucking make seeeeeeense. The universe cannot exiiiiiist!"
Or you could say that the universe has persisted from the past infinirely. And lo and behold, there are cosmoloical models (like the Carroll-Chen Model) which gives a plausible account of an eternal universe.
"The reason things will never get better is because people keep electing these rich cocksuckers who don't give a shit about you."
-George Carlin
-George Carlin