Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
85 online now:
nwr, PaulK, Phat, Stile, vimesey (5 members, 80 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,185 Year: 6,297/6,534 Month: 490/650 Week: 28/232 Day: 5/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Simplified Proof That The Universe Cannot Be Explained
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 156 of 342 (784556)
05-19-2016 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by kbertsche
05-19-2016 11:03 AM


His challenge is to provide a causal explanation for the first thing to exist in the universe."

Almost but not quite. Because apparently the word universe means everything including things that might be causes of the universe. So the challenge is to find a causal explanation for the first thing to exist even if that first thing is not typically considered part of the universe or even the multiverse. Of course if the challenge had been worded as such, nobody would have bothered with the challenge.

And of course all non-causal explanation, ones which would be perfectly acceptable are ruled out both by fiat and by some questionable logic in the OP.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


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 152 by kbertsche, posted 05-19-2016 11:03 AM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by kbertsche, posted 05-19-2016 5:37 PM NoNukes has replied
 Message 166 by nano, posted 05-19-2016 10:02 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 167 of 342 (784591)
05-19-2016 11:16 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by kbertsche
05-19-2016 5:37 PM


Exactly. Nano has been clear that by "universe" he includes anything and everything that exists. His challenge is to provide a causal explanation for the first thing that existed.

My real complaint is that I feel bait and switched. His proof does not demonstrate that the "universe cannot be explained" as is suggested by the title. Instead he demonstrates that if we place sufficient restrictions on what explanations are to be accepted, and if we define the universe to include other things that might conceivable explain the universe then we can remove the power to explain.

I don't see such gymnastics as having any useful purpose.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


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 160 by kbertsche, posted 05-19-2016 5:37 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 168 of 342 (784592)
05-19-2016 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by nano
05-19-2016 10:02 PM


Would it help to define "immediate explanations" vs. "the ultimate explanation"? I maintain that 2nd things and beyond can be immediately explained by the things that came before. However this is different than the ultimate explanation of the origin of the universe.

No. I understand what you want. Most of my objection is to the title of the thread.


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 166 by nano, posted 05-19-2016 10:02 PM nano has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 342 (784684)
05-21-2016 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by nano
05-21-2016 12:46 PM


So? First things can't be explained. That is part of my proof.

First things cannot have causal explanations. They may have explanations that are not descriptions of causation.

And why is something beyond challenge simply because it is part of your proof? Everything your proof relies on as well as its conclusion can be challenged. The only possible exceptions are assumptions that you put outside of challenge by making them axioms. But even then, if we don't accept your axioms, then your proof becomes something that can be discarded simply by pointing out that the axioms may not reflect reality.


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 180 by nano, posted 05-21-2016 12:46 PM nano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by nano, posted 05-21-2016 1:10 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 186 of 342 (784697)
05-21-2016 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by nano
05-21-2016 1:10 PM


I am genuinely interested. What types of explanations are not causal? And all challenges are accepted and legitimate.

Just as an example, radioactive decay events are uncaused. But we can completely describe the probabilities of a decay event occurring in terms of the fields and charges present in an unstable atom. We know why a decay happens, but there are no precursors other than the existence of the nucleus itself for decay. We cannot point to any state of the nucleus and say, this state prompts a particle to leave the nucleus now.

Given all of that, the quantum mechanical model completely describes and explains why and how a nucleus emits an alpha or beta particle.

Given another view, we might explain your genealogy as a sequence of who begat whom where the begats represents some portion of the cause. Or alternatively we might present a simple list of your ancestors and their relations without detailing any causes or begatting. Each of those would be a explanation of your history. Yes there are causes involved, but those neither the causes nor their details, nor the motivation for those causes need be part of the explanation.

I can explain why metal is conductive without explaining where electrons and protons come from, I can describe how transistors work without explaining where Silicon atoms originate. There is no sense in which such descriptions are not explanations.

You have co-opted the word explanation to mean 'only causal origin stories traceable to ultimate causes'. I have no problem with that. It was my error to misinterpret the meaning of 'explained' in the title to have the dictionary meaning and to force that over the alternate definition in the OP.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


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 183 by nano, posted 05-21-2016 1:10 PM nano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by nano, posted 05-22-2016 5:38 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 200 of 342 (784751)
05-22-2016 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by nano
05-22-2016 5:38 AM


I have said that there are immediate causes separate from the ultimate cause of everything.

How does that address my point. What I have said is that the term "explanation" is not limited to origin stories or causal explanations, but that you have limited the definition to such things for the purpose of this thread. I have acknowledged your right to do place such limitations.

If this is insufficient for you I would ask if you disagree with my base premise that the first thing cannot be explained

Haven't I been perfectly clear about about my position on this? You asked me to cite examples of explanations that were not causal. I did so but received no feedback other than to ask me a question I've answered several times.

In this way, even if my proof is a logical tautology it is still a useful one.

Let's agree to disagree about that.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


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 188 by nano, posted 05-22-2016 5:38 AM nano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by nano, posted 05-22-2016 5:18 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 207 of 342 (784778)
05-23-2016 1:48 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by nano
05-22-2016 5:18 PM


OK. Your only argument is over the use of the term "explained". As such I certainly acknowledge your right to do so though it seems like quibbling and doesn't address the merits of the proof at all.

That's not quite right. I acknowledged your right to define "explain" any way you want to.

My issue with your proof is simply that you have defined universe and explain in such a way that you have ruled out what are conventionally called explanations. In short your definitions and premises leave nothing left to prove.

It is as if you have defined father to include only living males, and then offered to prove that we could not identify an orphan's father. Yeah, that's true, but so what?


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 205 by nano, posted 05-22-2016 5:18 PM nano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by nano, posted 05-23-2016 5:02 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 215 of 342 (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 replied

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

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 225 of 342 (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 replied

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

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 227 of 342 (785231)
05-31-2016 1:03 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by ICANT
05-28-2016 9:19 PM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
But if I understand his argument it is that whatever caused the universe to exist can not be explained.

I'm referring to a different part of his argument that may not be explicitly stated in the OP. Apparently the term universe includes everything that ever existed. I proposed some natural forces outside of what is currently known as the universe, and was told that the definition of universe necessarily included them.


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 226 by ICANT, posted 05-28-2016 9:19 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by ICANT, posted 05-31-2016 1:50 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 233 of 342 (785245)
05-31-2016 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by ICANT
05-31-2016 1:50 PM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
The entities he talks about would have to exist outside of the universe to be able to cause the universe to exist.

Well by his definition, they are not. I know you are looking to have his formulation parallel your own belief, but it does not. Further, by his rules, even if we relaxed that problematic requirement, saying the God created the universe does not count as an explanation.

If you find that useful, please explain how.


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 229 by ICANT, posted 05-31-2016 1:50 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by ICANT, posted 06-01-2016 1:22 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 236 of 342 (785253)
06-01-2016 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 235 by ICANT
06-01-2016 1:22 AM


Re: Uncaused things don't need prior cause explanations.
We can rule out two branes banging together and producing the universe as they would have to have a vacuum in which to exist and bang together.

You understand that a vacuum is actually nothing, right? Seriously, you've skipped a step here. The two branes might well have existed in another universe, right? I know that is not allowed in the OPs theory.

But energy cannot be created so we would not exist today if the multiverse hypothesis was correct.

I see a couple of things wrong with that explanation. The prior multiverse might well have been full of energy some of which was used to create the current universe. Secondly, the total net energy in the current universe is at least approximately zero, and may well be zero. In such a case, there is no problem with conservation of energy.

In either event, you seem to be taking some liberties with the question I asked you. Under the OPs given conditions, God is simply part of the universe. My question was regarding why you might find such a situation of interest to you. Apparently the answer is that despite not resembling what your own pet theory, this thread is a sufficient platform for you to once more put forward your 'existence beginning to exist' conundrums without acknowledging any points raised in prior discussions. Nice.


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 235 by ICANT, posted 06-01-2016 1:22 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by ICANT, posted 06-03-2016 4:11 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 245 of 342 (785606)
06-07-2016 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by New Cat's Eye
06-07-2016 5:26 PM


You see how there is something, rather than nothing, in that second quote?

C'mon Cat Sci. You surely are aware that what is in the quote is a mathematical representation of an empty set. Of course the representation must have a physical appearance and nature even if the concept it represents does not.


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 244 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-07-2016 5:26 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2016 10:05 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 256 of 342 (785667)
06-08-2016 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by New Cat's Eye
06-08-2016 10:05 AM


The empty set is not nothing. It exists, has properties, and can have operations against it.

Beyond that, your initial argument was something a bit different. You simply quoted some mathematical symbols and suggested we look at them. But the braces you drew are just delineation. They don't represent anything physical.

Your current argument, as I see it, is akin to telling me that I have a stamp collection, but that my collection has no stamps and never did. Actually, I don't have a stamp collection and I don't want one.

The OP erroneously views the universe as a container that can be empty.

Interesting argument. Maybe you have something here. Before I ask you what you mean, I'll read more of what you've already posted.

If you want to analogize the universe as an empty set

But perhaps this does not. Arguments from analogy are not, in general, valid. Analogies are good for illustrating, but not for necessarily for proving an argument to be correct.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


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 248 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2016 10:05 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2016 9:06 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 260 of 342 (785680)
06-08-2016 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by New Cat's Eye
06-08-2016 9:06 PM


It's that a stamp collection that contains no stamps isn't a stamp collection at all.

Regardless of whether I never had a stamp collection, or whether I have just bought an album in anticipation of collecting stamps, or whether some rogue came by and stole all the stamps I've spent 10 years collecting, we might correctly say that the set of all stamps that I possess is described by the null set. In the latter case we might still say I own a stamp set, but that it is not in my possession.

In short, the null set does not help us understand the states of existence or what came before.


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 259 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2016 9:06 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022