Being can come from non-being

[Anomalocaris]

Consider the size of Earth compared to the size of the Universe.

Now consider how likely the answer to the Big Questions will be found here.

So thee visible universe is 90 billion lightyears across. That's 9*10^10 ly. One year has ~ 3*10^7 seconds, so the visible universe is 27*10^17 =2.7*10^18 lightseconds across. The earth is roughly 1/25 of a lightsecond wide, so the visible universe is about

67*10^18=6.7*10^19 earths wide. To get the fraction of the volume, we take the third power and find that the visible Universe has the volume of ~ 300*10^57  earth sized cubes and thus roughly 600*10^57=6*10^59 earths. Assuming equal distribution, the probability of finding the answer to the Big Questions on earth is therefore smaller than about 10^-60.

How do you know through the entire 90 billion lightyears things don’t repeat?   If it repeats but once the answer to the big question being found on earth would be a whole 8 times bigger.

Also how do yo know the dimensions of the answer to the Big Question is small next to the dimension of the earth?

If the answer to the Big Question is big, say  6.7*10^19 earths wide, then the out of the entire roughly 90 cubed billion unique cubic light year of the universe, the Chances it would happen to found in the middle of the one centered on earth would be 1.

---

Me no math.

You said consider the size of the universe, no backsies!

But Math May occur in his consideration as much as truth occurs in trump’s words.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Me no math.

You said consider the size of the universe, no backsies!

That's not math! That's '60s hippie shit.

---

Science can be counterintuitive but it should not be counter-rational (or irrational). It has to appeal to our reason, and I think Grandizer is saying that this idea doesn't.

Intuition is rationality in a wheelchair.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Intuition is rationality in a wheelchair.

Hmm the two are as distinct as rods are from cones, or fast twitch muscle fibers are from slow twitch fibers. Reason is conscious and analytical; intuitions are unconscious and affective. The two can be dissociated neurologically from one another, as can be seen with Antonio Damasio's patient H.M.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Intuition is rationality in a wheelchair.

Hmm the two are as distinct as rods are from cones, or fast twitch muscle fibers are from slow twitch fibers. Reason is conscious and analytical; intuitions are unconscious and affective. The two can be dissociated neurologically from one another, as can be seen with Antonio Damasio's patient H.M.

The best refutation would be found in Harry Potter and the Psychobabble.

[Mister Agenda]

Sure, the universe could be more of a mindfuck than it already is. But are we epistemologically justified, as far as we know, to accept the idea that being can come from absolute no-being given how counter intuitive it is and seemingly illogical and given we haven't observed such a thing?

My own intuition is that absolute nothingness is a self-contradictory state of affairs and therefore could never have really existed. Literally, lacking time, absolute nothingness could not even 'last' an instant. I think the quantum foam Krauss describes may be as little of something as it's possible for there to have ever been.

[Otangelo]

Sure, the universe could be more of a mindfuck than it already is. But are we epistemologically justified, as far as we know, to accept the idea that being can come from absolute no-being given how counter intuitive it is and seemingly illogical and given we haven't observed such a thing?

My own intuition is that absolute nothingness is a self-contradictory state of affairs and therefore could never have really existed. Literally, lacking time, absolute nothingness could not even 'last' an instant. I think the quantum foam Krauss describes may be as little of something as it's possible for there to have ever been.

Virtual particles require a quantum vacuum. So you have to ask what caused that quantum vacuum into being, since it could not be eternal.

[Peebothuhlu]

My own intuition is that absolute nothingness is a self-contradictory state of affairs and therefore could never have really existed. Literally, lacking time, absolute nothingness could not even 'last' an instant. I think the quantum foam Krauss describes may be as little of something as it's possible for there to have ever been.

Virtual particles require a quantum vacuum. So you have to ask what caused that quantum vacuum into being, since it could not be eternal.

Hello!

Uhm... no.

That's not quite what the example is giving/doing.

The theological position would seem to be 'Something can not come from nothing.'

The, dare I say, "Naturalist" is offering an example of a particle suddenly being where no particle had been before. Such is the nature of Hawking Radiation.

As far as I know the actuallity of 'Nothing' as now put forth by theologians seems only to be a thought experiment as the very thing that's being proposed would not even seem coherant and/or possible.

'Nothing' would seem to be no more than a concept. Just as Escher's "Endless stair" and other visual treats are amazing. None can actually be a reailty in the physical world as we know it.

The other saying is "A cause can not be 'non-caused'." As in there must be a causal chain reaching back as far as the mind can see. The refuation of this with a 'practical' and 'natural' example is nuclear decay. The completely random splitting of one unstable elemental atom dwon into its daughter atoms.

The best we can ascertain is that, over the life of the original unstable atom 'Half' will decay.
We cannot (Litterally) know which of the atoms will decay. Nor, I think, exactly the 'when' of those atoms decaying BUT after a given amount of time half WILL have converted into daughter atoms.

Again, both examples above are just the best a 'Natural' view can give of things that contradict or invalidate the two sayings.

Cheers.

Not at work.

[GrandizerII]

My own intuition is that absolute nothingness is a self-contradictory state of affairs and therefore could never have really existed. Literally, lacking time, absolute nothingness could not even 'last' an instant. I think the quantum foam Krauss describes may be as little of something as it's possible for there to have ever been.

Virtual particles require a quantum vacuum. So you have to ask what caused that quantum vacuum into being, since it could not be eternal.

Asserts who?

[Otangelo]

Virtual particles require a quantum vacuum. So you have to ask what caused that quantum vacuum into being, since it could not be eternal.

Asserts who?

Science. 

https://medium.com/nakshatra/the-nature-...4033e752f4

the quantum field gently vibrates randomly. Sometimes this producesenough energy to form particles out of seemingly nothing!

[ThinkingIsThinking]

(1) Nothing is not anything.

(2) That which is not anything cannot be anything.

(3) That which cannot be anything cannot come from anything.

(4) non-being is not anything.

(5) Conclusion: non-being can't come from anything

Form:

(1) A is always B

(2) B is always C

(3) C is always D

(4) E is always A

(5) Conclusion: E is always D