What 'you' do NOT YET KNOW does NOT mean that 'we' have ALREADY DISCOVERED and UNCOVERED.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 5:32 pm Why there’s something rather than nothing
By Joel Achenbach at the Washington Post
Still, think about that. How can any definitions that we mere mortals here on planet Earth come up with to encompass "nothing" not start with the fact that we are in a "something" going all the way back to all that we do not know about existence itself?Any attempt to answer the question has to be clear about the definition of “nothing.”
See, the definition that encompasses 'nothing' is, REALLY, SO SIMPLE and EASY to come up with. And, the definition that has ALREADY eventuated is one that fits in PERFECTLY with the One UNIFIED GUT and TOE.
That definition, by the way, for those of 'you' who are Truly interested, can be explained in Truly VERY SIMPLE and EASY terms.
Oh, and by the way, OF COURSE there is a 'something', which, so-called, 'goes all the way back to the eternal NOW'. See, contrary to popular belief by some, Existence, Itself, IS ETERNAL.
This is a bit like defining the things that one does NOT YET KNOW as being IMPOSSIBLE for ANY one else to be able to define, uncover, nor KNOW.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 5:32 pm It would be like those in Flatland defining the third dimension in order to grasp it as we do. Defining it into existence. And the novella Flatland was a satirical account of the rigid class morality that was Victorian England. So, let's define morality into existence in order to determine which actual behaviors we choose are right or wrong.
See, what 'you', do NOT YET KNOW about Existence "iambiguous" is ALREADY old knowledge for some of 'us'.
LOL If 'you' are to STUPID to be able to define a word, or even be able to look it up in a dictionary, then so be it, but the rest of 'us' are NOT that STUPID.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 5:32 pm Then the part where whatever we define "nothing" to be, it's then definitions all the way down...
Also, talk about letting one's own made up BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS affect the way they LOOK AT and SEE things from then on.
LOL Your CLAIM that the definition of 'nothing' is then 'definitions all the way down', could be SAID and CLAIMED about the definition for ANY word. But if you want to SAY or BELIEVE otherwise, then 'what', EXACTLY, is the DIFFERENCE?
LOL WHY would ANY one think, believe, assume, or imagine that there was, let alone even could, 'nothing at all'?iambiguous wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 5:32 pmAll the way back to, "okay, but what came before nothing at all?"It is not enough to describe a mechanism in which a baby universe might spark into being through a quantum fluctuation and then undergo expansion and inflation and increasing complexity until finally we wind up with galaxies and planets and dolphins shooting up out of a pool to grab a fish from the trainer. To my mind, that just takes the question back to an early condition that yet requires an explanation.
What makes 'you', people, think of things could be true when they are, obviously, LOGICALLY and PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE?
The 'thing' of 'nothing at all' can NOT be defined into existence. But the definition, itself, which FITS PERFECTLY that conception ALREADY EXISTS.
What IS IRREFUTABLY True regarding the Universe, Itself, is ALREADY KNOWN by some of 'us'.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 5:32 pmHow about this then from Wittgenstein: “Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”In that scenario your “nothing” still has qualities that give rise to something. It’s not a true nothing. My version of zero has no superscripts. And if you can tell me there’s a Multiverse from which our universe bubbled forth, you’ve merely moved the fundamental problem of existence back onto a broader platform.
Only we really have no idea "here and now" if the human brain itself, as but one component of a mind-numbingly vast multiverse is even capable of pinning something like that down.
But, SEE there are those who are YET TO SEE, and who BELIEVE it is IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE. These ones REMAIN back in the OLD DAYS, in and with APE thinking.
The word 'multiverse' was just MADE UP to explain what was ONCE impossible to explain. The word 'multiverse', as ALREADY EXPLAINED, only moves what some of 'you' are STILL yet to LEARN and UNDERSTAND.
'you', "iambiguous", may not YET know these, and other, things, but that CERTAINLY DOES NOT mean nor even imply that 'we' have NOT YET ALREADY COME-TO-KNOW, what 'you' DO NOT.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 5:32 pm We don't even know whether, if it does, it was never able not to in a wholly determined Reality.
Talk about introducing CRAP, in order to just 'try to' BUILD UP and SUPPORT one's OWN BELIEFS.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 5:32 pmWe can't leave Him out, right?This also covers the God explanation. If God is the ultimate cause of the universe, I’ll want to know why God exists. The obvious answer is: He just does. He is. He’s what Holt calls the Supreme Brute Fact. He explains himself. And so on.
He just does. Presto! God and His "mysterious ways" account for everything.