Where did the nothing come from?

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by answers, Apr 15, 2006.

  1. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member


    Your userid is disingenuous - instead, it should be "Bible Answers"
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. RoyLennigan Registered Senior Member

    how does an eternal presence conflict with "natural law". and what, by your definition, is this "natural law". it is impossible, by definition, that something could somehow come from nothing. it doesn't matter if you look at it scientifically, or on a basis of faith, or theoretically--its impossible. which means that there must have always been something here, its the only other option. nothing simply cannot exist. even the vacuum of space is a fluid of energy--it is made of something, it is not empty.

    i think you have a skewed understanding of science. everything is scientific because, even if it isn't deemed scientific right now, once we understand it it can become scientific. science changes to fit into how we percieve the world. so if we find out something new about the universe then we have to change our understanding of science and how we discover things. you're viewing science as an absolute thing when it is transient, it is continually changing.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Where's my answer?

    I asked where does God come from?
    Just like you can't say where God comes from, scientists can't say what the state of the universe was that led to the rapid expansion of space and time that we call the big bang. At present, the only kinds of evidence we can detect would have been destroyed in the process. That doesn't mean that both theories have equal credibility. The big bang theory, which you are lumping in with evolutionary theory (presumably because they have identical status in your mind as secular challenges to traditional theology) is based on an extrapolation of evidence that we can observe, such as the red shift of light coming from distant stars, and the pattern of backround radiation everywhere.

    The big bang describes the origin of space (the nothingness between matter), and time (the distance between events), so the presence of a distinct nothingness before the rapid expansion of everything is not certain. Before the big bang, perhaps there was a special kind of nothing, immeasurable, and undetectable, an absense of anything by which it could be measured or be said to exist at all.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. mumadadd Registered Member

    I was hoping somebody here could help me find recognised (or at least known) theories similar to my own. I don't believe in god in a religious sense, but think there is something fundamental (i use this word rather that simple) that explains existance as a whole.

    My own opinions are based on observation and thought; religion I find stupid (no offence), and science explains things within a very tight spectrum.

    I like many elements of buddhism (as a philosophy), mainly the detatchment from the 'self' as an entity, and the innate connection between everything as a whole as opposed to many parts.

    It's hard to phrase, but I see some kind of loop in play; something that HAD to be, without begining or end. I do see some direction too; energy organising into matter, matter into life, life evolving. It would take me longer than I have to elaborate, so aplologies if this seems simplistic.

    I appreciate that this is out of place in this forum, but I was impressed by the opinions raised here (and grammar) - except the creationists (which I suspect to be a fix).

    answers; learn about apostrophes (notice there isn't one in the word).
  8. Cyperium I'm always me Valued Senior Member

    Nah, matter can't come out of nowhere. Why do you argue that matter can come out of nowhere???

    There is no logic in the statement Athelwulf. You would rather think that things can exist in nothing (which is ENTIRELY selfcontradicting) What would it exist in???? Worse you must assume that we STILL exist in nothing!!!

    Only infinite can exist in a "nothing" which wouldn't exist.

    If nothing exist as you say then it is not nothing anymore.

    If something arrives at nothing, then nothing exist, cause something cannot exist in nothing, if we don't redefine the word nothing to be something.

    Your brain is playing with words in such a way that you soon cannot understand even the simplest concept.

Share This Page