Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 89 (8876 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-10-2018 2:16 PM
191 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Bill Holbert
Post Volume:
Total: 843,762 Year: 18,585/29,783 Month: 530/2,043 Week: 82/386 Day: 32/50 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1314
15
1617
...
23Next
Author Topic:   A Simplified Proof That The Universe Cannot Be Explained
nano
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 09-25-2012


Message 211 of 331 (784807)
05-23-2016 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Hyroglyphx
05-23-2016 4:31 AM


Hyroglyphx writes:

In that case it would seem that if all things are temporal, at least something about the properties of the universe is either infinite or exists outside of the time-space continuum.


Agreed.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Hyroglyphx, posted 05-23-2016 4:31 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16065
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 212 of 331 (784810)
05-23-2016 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by bluegenes
05-23-2016 4:58 AM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
Certainly. And it could be a horse box without a horse. If we could take everything out of our box, every particle, and try to get an absence of space time itself, what might happen at the point where we seem to achieve it, instead of the desired result, whoosh "big bang", we've created another set of dimensions, lots of somethingness, and become gods.

That's rather speculative.

In order for someone to have a proof that the universe is inexplicable, they need to show that it can never be explained without reference to prior cause.

That seems to have been done.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by bluegenes, posted 05-23-2016 4:58 AM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by bluegenes, posted 05-24-2016 3:58 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 452 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 213 of 331 (784829)
05-24-2016 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 212 by Dr Adequate
05-23-2016 5:49 PM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
Adequate writes:

That seems to have been done.

To one of us.

If a logical argument assumes any thing to be necessary, it can't be used against the necessity of somethingness. If logic is contingent, it requires somethingness.

Does logic necessarily exist, or is it contingent?

All things are necessary or contingent
The universe cannot have a prior cause
The universe cannot be contingent on anything
The universe is necessary


This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-23-2016 5:49 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
nano
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 09-25-2012


Message 214 of 331 (784888)
05-25-2016 6:27 AM


My proof is like leading someone to the North Pole and asking them to go north. Then they suddenly realize they can't do that.

Thanks to Dr. Adequate for suggesting this analogy earlier in this thread.


Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by NoNukes, posted 05-25-2016 3:23 PM nano has responded
 Message 218 by bluegenes, posted 05-26-2016 4:26 AM nano has responded

    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 215 of 331 (784905)
05-25-2016 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by nano
05-25-2016 6:27 AM


My proof is like leading someone to the North Pole and asking them to go north. Then they suddenly realize they can't do that.

Or how about, your proof is like telling someone at the North Pole that they cannot go north and having them simply reply 'Duh'.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by nano, posted 05-25-2016 6:27 AM nano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by nano, posted 05-26-2016 9:09 AM NoNukes has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6116
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 216 of 331 (784920)
05-25-2016 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by bluegenes
05-23-2016 4:58 AM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
Hi bluegenes

bluegenes writes:

That may be the sort of thing that happened somewhere (not nowhere) 14 billion years ago.

Where do you propose that somewhere would come from?

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by bluegenes, posted 05-23-2016 4:58 AM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by bluegenes, posted 05-26-2016 4:39 AM ICANT has responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6116
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 217 of 331 (784926)
05-26-2016 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by AZPaul3
05-17-2016 5:17 PM


Hi Paul

Paul writes:

It may be that the "first thing" was caused by a quantum fluctuation operating from nothing.

I don't know what your definition of 'nothing' is.
But if by nothing you mean non existence there would have been no quantum fluctuation.

Existence would be required for a quantum fluctuation to take place, as space and a vacuum is required.

Space and a vacuum only exist inside of the universe unless there is something that exists outside the universe. Which I have been told here many times that nothing exists outside the universe, as it was a self contained unit.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by AZPaul3, posted 05-17-2016 5:17 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

    
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 452 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(1)
Message 218 of 331 (784929)
05-26-2016 4:26 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by nano
05-25-2016 6:27 AM


nano writes:

My proof is like leading someone to the North Pole and asking them to go north. Then they suddenly realize they can't do that.

That's an explanation by analogy.

Your O.P. is actually a partial explanation of the universe, which goes like this:

First, you define what we mean by universe. It encompasses everything so it's the set of all things. Then you point out that, as such, no single thing or collection of things can be its prior cause.

You then point out that this would apply whether the universe popped into existence or always exists. That's as far as you go, because you mistakenly assume at this point that what your explanation has established is that the universe is inexplicable.

What you could have done is continued with the logical explanation after adding the observation that the universe does exist. Therefore, the universe does not require a prior cause. Therefore, any explanation of the existence of the universe doesn't have to refer to a prior cause now that we've reached the point in our explanation that it doesn't have one and doesn't need one. We can also conclude that the suggestion at the end of your O.P., that the universe always existed, is correct, because there cannot be anything (including time) prior to it, so there is no "prior".

Having followed this through, I'm claiming that the existence of the universe is explained by necessity. If there's no possible alternative, then it has to exist. So, do you understand why Dr. Adequate and I are discussing whether or not pure nothingness can be regarded as "possible"? Because the O.P. definition of the universe encompasses everything, pure nothingness is the only conceivable alternative.

That's where a discussion on whether or not the universe can be explained inevitably leads.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by nano, posted 05-25-2016 6:27 AM nano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by nano, posted 05-26-2016 3:02 PM bluegenes has responded
 Message 224 by ICANT, posted 05-28-2016 2:51 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 452 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 219 of 331 (784930)
05-26-2016 4:39 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by ICANT
05-25-2016 10:30 PM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
ICANT writes:

Where do you propose that somewhere would come from?

God Bless

I propose that there's always somewhere and always something and that there's no such thing as "before time".

You're probably misunderstanding the O.P. It allows for a first thing and allows it to be your god, but merely points out that a first thing can't have a prior cause (obviously) and therefore can't be explained by one (obviously). Read "universe" in the O.P. as meaning "everything" including all gods.

Necessity Bless


This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by ICANT, posted 05-25-2016 10:30 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by ICANT, posted 05-28-2016 1:44 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

  
nano
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 09-25-2012


Message 220 of 331 (784935)
05-26-2016 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 215 by NoNukes
05-25-2016 3:23 PM


Of course it depends on the person and the extent of their thinking on the subject. Therefore my proof is useful.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by NoNukes, posted 05-25-2016 3:23 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
nano
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 09-25-2012


Message 221 of 331 (784964)
05-26-2016 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by bluegenes
05-26-2016 4:26 AM


bluegenes writes:

Having followed this through, I'm claiming that the existence of the universe is explained by necessity. If there's no possible alternative, then it has to exist.


All the hubbub over the term "explain" is just quibbling. My proof is logical and useful. However, your assertion that the universe is explained by necessity is very interesting. I'm just not sure its logical. I'll have to think about it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by bluegenes, posted 05-26-2016 4:26 AM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by bluegenes, posted 05-27-2016 3:07 AM nano has not yet responded

    
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 452 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 222 of 331 (785001)
05-27-2016 3:07 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by nano
05-26-2016 3:02 PM


nano writes:

All the hubbub over the term "explain" is just quibbling. My proof is logical and useful. However, your assertion that the universe is explained by necessity is very interesting. I'm just not sure its logical. I'll have to think about it.

You would need to change the wording of your proof if you accept that anything could possibly be explained in any way other than by prior cause. That still leaves you with a proof that the universe cannot have a prior cause (and, logically, that it cannot be explained by a prior cause; and, logically, that it doesn't require a prior cause, 'cos it's here).

If you enjoy doing proofs, here's a good suggestion for a title:

"A Simplified Proof That No Thing or Set of Things Could Prevent The Universe From Existing".

Once we've defined the universe as including all things, it follows logically, doesn't it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by nano, posted 05-26-2016 3:02 PM nano has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6116
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 223 of 331 (785112)
05-28-2016 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 219 by bluegenes
05-26-2016 4:39 AM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
Hi bluegenes

bluegenes writes:

I propose that there's always somewhere and always something and that there's no such thing as "before time".

Do you mean always as in an eternal existence where somewhere/something could exist?

I thought you believed in the Big Bang Theory?

According to the BBT the universe can not have existed eternally as it would be dead by now due to entropy.

bluegenes writes:

You're probably misunderstanding the O.P.

No, I understand that the OP allows for a first uncaused thing, which would have to be an eternal entity.

But current science does not allow for eternal existence, as it can not get to T=0 must lest past it as the math breaks down.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by bluegenes, posted 05-26-2016 4:39 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by NoNukes, posted 05-28-2016 3:12 PM ICANT has responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6116
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 224 of 331 (785115)
05-28-2016 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by bluegenes
05-26-2016 4:26 AM


Hi bluegenes

bluegenes writes:

Having followed this through, I'm claiming that the existence of the universe is explained by necessity. If there's no possible alternative, then it has to exist. So, do you understand why Dr. Adequate and I are discussing whether or not pure nothingness can be regarded as "possible"? Because the O.P. definition of the universe encompasses everything, pure nothingness is the only conceivable alternative.

The universe does exist that is a fact.

Due to the fact that the universe is running out of usable energy it could not have existed eternally in the past.

Therefore the universe had to have a beginning to exist as it has not run out of usable energy yet.

At the present there is no scientific THEORY of how the universe began to exist. There are several guesses but there is nothing that reaches a consensus.

That means that the existence of the universe can not be explained by science.

The only way the existence of the universe can be explained so far is by the uncaused cause mentioned in the OP.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by bluegenes, posted 05-26-2016 4:26 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Stile, posted 05-31-2016 12:35 PM ICANT has responded

    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 225 of 331 (785177)
05-28-2016 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by ICANT
05-28-2016 1:44 AM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
No, I understand that the OP allows for a first uncaused thing, which would have to be an eternal entity.

Actually, the poster of the OP denies that possibility. That is one of the complaints about the OP.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by ICANT, posted 05-28-2016 1:44 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by ICANT, posted 05-28-2016 9:19 PM NoNukes has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1314
15
1617
...
23Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018