[Anthrobus]

Do you have any idea? Do you even wonder sometimes, how it is possible, that there exists something at all? Next to nobody of the people i know is giving a single thought to this question that is strangely haunting me. Maybe you could give me some fresh ideas, as i am stuck somehow?

I don't believe in eternal life, divine beings and consider religion as an, possibly important, institution invented to convince people to some orderly behaviour in the world of the living. And with death, the atoms of the body dissipate and so does the brain and everting stored in it.

Quantum theory and associated experiments show, that our daily-life concept of reality is not applicable to the events on quantum level, while mathematic descriptions of what is happening are reaching at least somewat deeper. The "real reality" is something totally different from what we think. Very strange, how sly the physics of the microcosmos evade the questions that they are confronted with... But i am no physicist.

Maybe even the conclusion "i think, therefore i am" is in some way incorrect. Maybe the conclusion is that there is no difference between existing and not existing. I beat on my solid desk, but the desk and i may be just of the same level of "non-existence" or, expressed in other terms, the desk is as real as i but we together may still inexist, the sum of everything equalling zero. Nothing and everything being the same. And we somewhere between these extremes that meet in the same point. I don't like this thought but have none better in this case. And yet the roses stung me doing gardening today.

Maybe the universe banged out of some quantum fluctuation but this could only have happened within a vacuum that has physical properties, so all this is just pushing the question back further, where do these properties come from?

I do not want to resort to some religion to get out of this dilemma. Neither do i want to become the equivalent of a quantum cook, using recipies without giving a further thought. But the imagination, that there seems to exist a world out there that must have began out of something, while it at the same time it seems impossible for anything to come from nothing (which must have been there in the forst place) is very stressing to the intellectual mind. Staying inquisitive, sane and rational to the last is a hopless task, obviously. At least i know now, why the concept of a divine being is necessary to relieve people from this abyss of questioning.

Any ideas, links or similar questions?

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anthrobus', 'D')o you have any idea? Do you even wonder sometimes, how it is possible, that there exists something at all?

[rwwff]

Well, if you want to avoid religious understandings of the beginning of everything; then the most direct way to approach it is one that is often suggested by cosmologists.

The "big bang" is the beginning point of any energy, matter, and information that we are able to observe, nothing survives from before that point in time; and that point in time can be analyzed in a series of steps infinitely approaching but never reaching zero time.

If you need a source for the big bang, you are reaching past the point of scientifically available information, and off into speculation. A useable speculation is that the universe collapses and then goes boom, repeatedly, every umpteen trillion years or whatever.

For myself, a fairly religious person in real life, "And God said, let there be light" seems every bit as useful, and dovetails well with my spiritual beliefs, I feel an added sense of mystery and wonder that I wouldn't feel otherwise. But you can't kid yourself; all you are really doing is selecting a method by which you can be comfortable with the idea that there is no observable information that predates that zero time marked at the bigbang.

You can also see that logically, such a divine source explanation simply transplants the "beginning" question from "where is the beginning of the universe?" to "where is the beginning of God?" The answer to which can, again, not be determined scientifically through observation; but can be explained in theological terms.

Dressing up the answer to the "beginning" question with technobabble simply parallels the religious selection but without the support of thousands of very well educated thinkers throughout history who've taken time to ponder this sort of thing.

So, if you want to stay scientifically grounded, stay with the cosmologists, and get used to saying, "it is not known". There is nothing wrong with stating flatly that something is beyond our knowledge, or even beyond the limits to what we can know.

[Carrie]

I'm an agnostic, but I've never been content with the strictly materialistic explanation for the universe. It boggles my mind that I find myself at this particular time & place, which seems so incredibly unique. What are the odds? Why wasn't I born an ant? Or why am I not a speck of dust in some nebula?

Sometimes I think that when I finally die & go back to the non-existence I came from (if that's my fate), some part of me will be muttering, "what the &$%#@ was that?!?"

One possibility I've been pondering lately is the theory that this is part of some sort of simulation, which some physicists think is more likely:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')ydney Morning Herald - The multiverse theory has spawned another - that our universe is a simulation, writes Paul Davies.

If you've ever thought life was actually a dream, take comfort. Some pretty distinguished scientists may agree with you. Philosophers have long questioned whether there is in fact a real world out there, or whether "reality" is just a figment of our imagination.

Then along came the quantum physicists, who unveiled an Alice-in-Wonderland realm of atomic uncertainty, where particles can be waves and solid objects dissolve away into ghostly patterns of quantum energy.

Now cosmologists have got in on the act, suggesting that what we perceive as the universe might in fact be nothing more than a gigantic simulation...

So if there exist civilisations with cosmic simulating ability, then the fake universes they create would rapidly proliferate to outnumber the real ones. After all, virtual reality is a lot cheaper than the real thing. So by simple statistics, a random observer like you or me is most probably a simulated being in a fake world. And viewed from inside the matrix, we could never tell the difference.

[Armageddon]

big bang, hmmm.. So something blew up, and it happened to create this beautiful earth, that is the exact distance from the sun to sustain life, and it never alters it course, and has an eco system that is balanced to perfection, and developes gravity to sustain the molecular structure of atoms to keep livings things alive ? And somehow trees develop to take in poiseness gas and turns it into oxygen for all living things to breathe. And millions of unique and distinctive creatures form, and give birth to one another to keep their population alive. And the marvulous human body forms from all this, that has a brain capacity that can think and reason better than a supercomputer. And somehow water formed that is essential for life , and the ground produces food for living things to eat. Boy, that was one heck of a smart explosion. Thats like blowing up a paper factory, and an entire set of encyclopedias come crashing down in full form.

[Zardoz]

This commentary on Carl Sagan's "Cosmos"...

Carl Sagan's Religion of Science

...comes to this beautifully simple conclusion:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hus, to arrive at an answer to the question of the origin and nature of the universe that is both intellectually and religiously satisfying, all we need to do is to keep looking for the facts. Knowledge is at once the ultimate means and the ultimate end.

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('armegeddon', 'b')ig bang, hmmm..
So something blew up

[Lighthouse]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', '.')..

nothing survives from before that point in time;

...

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'I') feel an added sense of mystery and wonder that I wouldn't feel otherwise.

[CrudeAwakening]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carrie', ' ')Why wasn't I born an ant? Or why am I not a speck of dust in some nebula?

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lighthouse', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', '
')nothing survives from before that point in time;

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CrudeAwakening', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carrie', ' ')Why wasn't I born an ant? Or why am I not a speck of dust in some nebula?

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rogerhb', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'I') feel an added sense of mystery and wonder that I wouldn't feel otherwise.

[CrudeAwakening]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rogerhb', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CrudeAwakening', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carrie', ' ')Why wasn't I born an ant? Or why am I not a speck of dust in some nebula?

[Zardoz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('armegeddon', 'b')ig bang, hmmm... So something blew up, and it happened to create this beautiful earth...

...Thats like blowing up a paper factory, and an entire set of encyclopedias come crashing down in full form.

[Omnium]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anthrobus', 'D')o you have any idea? Do you even wonder sometimes, how it is possible, that there exists something at all? Next to nobody of the people i know is giving a single thought to this question that is strangely haunting me. Maybe you could give me some fresh ideas, as i am stuck somehow?



Any ideas, links or similar questions?

[Omnium]

To the person asking why 'something' exists rather than nothing at all? :

Here is a good link:

Why Something Exists


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he strange exhilarating paradox visible here can be thought about for a long time, and after every avenue is explored and every escape route is attempted without success, it becomes apparent that the term non-existence is a conceptual mistake. As a result we wonder why we exist instead of nothing at all, because our thoughts default to a vague understanding of nothing and non-existence, and we fail to recognize that a universe has to exist, for nothing at all is not really an alternative, since non-existence cannot be. In a mindful state, non-existence should seem to us to be absolutely impossible, and being should seem to us to be absolutely inevitable and natural.

[Omnium]

In Penrose's 'A road to Reality' in the section which he discusses conventional ontologies of quantum theory he mentions that:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'o')ne should not ask that any 'reality' be assigned to quantum-level phenomena, the only acknowledged reality being that of the classical world within which the experimenter's apparatus finds its home. One might take the view that this 'classical world' comes in not at the level of some piece of 'macroscopic machinery' that constitutes the observer's measuring apparatus, but at the level of the observer's own consciousness.

[Omnium]

So essentially, IT didn't have to choose one option or the other.

I mean, really there are only a few options.

1) SOMETHING (existence exists)

2) NOTHING (no words can describe 'nothing', leave BLANK)


So 'IT' only had TWO possible choices or FOUR possible combination of choices.

1) something exists, (thus #2 does not exist)

2) Nothing. (thus #1 does not exists)

3) Something AND Nothing (CONTRADICTION! Not possible!!!)

4) Not(Something) AND Not(Nothing) (CONTRADICTION!!!!)

So if you were 'IT' what option would you choose???
One or TWO?

You can only choose one and you MUST choose one.

I think 'IT' choose BOTH, SOmething exists AND Nothing.
A superposition of all possible and impossible 'things', a combination of all alternatives, all choices, all of the infinity of infinity possibilities and potentialalities of the grand totality of all existence and otherwise.

In essence, 'perfection' includes EVERYTHING and nothing (not even 'nothing') is left out!!!!!!

Understand???

So the paradox of it all is that you EXISTS AND you DON"T.

That was the ONLY possible combination it COULD have been, that EVERYTHING that could be IS. So we are in this infinite superposition of endless existence of everything that is and is NOT.

That is the paradox of Zero and Infinity, Relativity and Quantum physics, Zeno, Calculus, Mandelbrot Set, God, the ethereal,
imaginary numbers, abstract mathematical 'existence' of certain entities, awareness, conciousness, self-image, qualia and epiphenomenon. 1 and 0, on and off, light and darkness. Good and Evil.

The only thing that does exist, the only thing that COULD exists, is the superpositional state of all possible things, the superposition of everything AND nothing, simulatanouesly occuring as ONE!

That is the paradox. We are real AND imaginary.

We are complex creatures!

[Omnium]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')ost scientists trained in the current paradigm believe that consciousness is an epiphenomenon of material evolution. They argue that the universe evolved for billions of years before life and consciousness began to appear. This view of consciousness, like any other scientific theory, has its a priori assumptions, and the first step in the formal presentation of a scientific theory is to enumerate the a priori assumptions upon which the theory is based. Surprisingly, there is one assumption, perhaps the most basic assumption of all in the current scientific paradigm, that is rarely ever articulated. This is because it seems to be so obviously true that most scientists see no need to include it explicitly in the written accounts of their work. This rarely-mentioned assumption is the assumption that physical reality is independent of consciousness.

In the formulation of the theory of relativity, for example, Albert Einstein spelled out the assumptions of constant light speed and no preferred reference frame, but saw no need to mention mind-matter independence. Einstein was certainly aware of this underlying assumption, but to find his acknowledgement of it, we have to turn to his more general writings. In James Clerke Maxwell: A Commemorative Volume, he said: "The belief in an external world independent of the perceiving subject is the basis of all natural science."