The Problem of Nothingness
Aug 29, 2019 14:55:53 GMT -5
Post by Radrook Admin on Aug 29, 2019 14:55:53 GMT -5
The Problem of Nothingness
Was there ever a time when nothing existed? Well if there ever was such a time, then nothing would exist now because you can't get something from nothing. No, not the nothing which physicists claim is nothing., but a real absolute nothingness involving location as well. Physicists have a serious problem with such a nothingness. So in order get around the absolutely nothing problem, they have proposed that it is impossible for absolute nothingness to exist. But that's just a cop-out for avoiding the issue. The truth is that if there indeed was a time or an eternity during which absolutely nothing existed, neither matter nor location, then that nothingness would have eternally perpetuated itself.
Remember, we are referring to a real nothingness, not the nothingness which proposes other dimensions from where particles can bubble up and tunnel into ours but a real one that doesn't allow for such an escape from logic.
In order to escape that logic the Steady State theory was proposed. The universe had always existed as it is constantly renewing its worn out parts. But the Big Bang theory, which describes our universe as coming suddenly into existence out of seemingly nowhere, put an end to the convenient escape from logic.
Now, if indeed the universe appeared out of nowhere, then that's similar to saying abracadabra and causing something to exist without anyone there to say the word abracadabra. So in order to escape the inevitable conclusion that the universe came into existence from out of nowhere, they have proposed another somewhere from which it could have emerged and declared nothingness impossible.
The problem with such an explanation is that in order to emerge into existence we need two locations. One to emerge into and one from where to emerge from. Such locations are something and proposing them violates the nothingness requirement of the hypothetical. Nothingness cannot allow for such a locations to exist.
In short, in such a nothingness reality, there would be nowhere for the universe to emerge into or appear into or from. So once more the concept of nothingness is set aside in order to avoid what is considered intolerable-a first cause, a creator.
Now, they have asked where such a Creator would have emerged from? Well, if you were one of those scientists who calmly accepted that the Steady State Theory could be true, and that the universe had eternally existed, then you should be having absolutely no trouble with the eternalness of a creator. To take umbrage with one while calmly accepting the other is called inconsistency of policy and strongly indicates a calculated undisguised dishonesty unbefitting those who claim to be searching for facts regardless of how distasteful they might prove to be.
Remember, we are referring to a real nothingness, not the nothingness which proposes other dimensions from where particles can bubble up and tunnel into ours but a real one that doesn't allow for such an escape from logic.
In order to escape that logic the Steady State theory was proposed. The universe had always existed as it is constantly renewing its worn out parts. But the Big Bang theory, which describes our universe as coming suddenly into existence out of seemingly nowhere, put an end to the convenient escape from logic.
Now, if indeed the universe appeared out of nowhere, then that's similar to saying abracadabra and causing something to exist without anyone there to say the word abracadabra. So in order to escape the inevitable conclusion that the universe came into existence from out of nowhere, they have proposed another somewhere from which it could have emerged and declared nothingness impossible.
The problem with such an explanation is that in order to emerge into existence we need two locations. One to emerge into and one from where to emerge from. Such locations are something and proposing them violates the nothingness requirement of the hypothetical. Nothingness cannot allow for such a locations to exist.
In short, in such a nothingness reality, there would be nowhere for the universe to emerge into or appear into or from. So once more the concept of nothingness is set aside in order to avoid what is considered intolerable-a first cause, a creator.
Now, they have asked where such a Creator would have emerged from? Well, if you were one of those scientists who calmly accepted that the Steady State Theory could be true, and that the universe had eternally existed, then you should be having absolutely no trouble with the eternalness of a creator. To take umbrage with one while calmly accepting the other is called inconsistency of policy and strongly indicates a calculated undisguised dishonesty unbefitting those who claim to be searching for facts regardless of how distasteful they might prove to be.