Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9071 total)
52 online now:
Tanypteryx (1 member, 51 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 892,995 Year: 4,107/6,534 Month: 321/900 Week: 27/150 Day: 0/27 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Simplified Proof That The Universe Cannot Be Explained
RAZD
Member (Idle past 632 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 296 of 342 (793370)
10-26-2016 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by nano
10-26-2016 4:43 PM


The First Thing is the first thing to ever exist. At the point of its existence there is nothing else in the universe. ...

But the "First Thing" is not the universe, it is in the universe.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by nano, posted 10-26-2016 4:43 PM nano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by nano, posted 10-28-2016 1:34 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 632 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 311 of 342 (793430)
10-28-2016 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 304 by nano
10-28-2016 1:34 PM


... It doesn't matter what the first thing is, it is the first thing to ever exist anywhere. It could be a particle, a force, an underlying structure/law of the universe or even God.

I'm just trying to understand why you think a tautology is an important statement.

If the "first thing" is outside the universe (see brane theory for creating universes) how is it a "first thing" for the universe?

Or consider two universes (physics allows multiple universes to exist) ... is a "first thing" in one also the "first thing" in the other or did one come before the other?

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by nano, posted 10-28-2016 1:34 PM nano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 312 by nano, posted 10-28-2016 4:27 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 632 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 318 of 342 (793443)
10-29-2016 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 312 by nano
10-28-2016 4:27 PM


... Thank you for calling my proof statement a tautology because it is true by necessity and by its logical form.

A tautology is mundanely true because it references itself, and is therefore meaningless.

As I have stated, when I say "universe" I mean:

universe = multiverse = all of existence

Ah, so you redefine words to maintain your dogma. Unfortunately for you, that does not make it true.

And I noticed you didn't address the rest of my post:

quote:
If the "first thing" is outside the universe (see brane theory for creating universes) how is it a "first thing" for the universe?

In fact all your replies seem to be one-liners to one issue at a time. I'll keep this in mind.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : quote


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 312 by nano, posted 10-28-2016 4:27 PM nano has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 632 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 319 of 342 (793444)
10-29-2016 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 315 by nano
10-29-2016 7:29 AM


Tangle writes:

What if the first thing was nothing?

A confusion of terms and another red herring.

Actually it is an aspect of current thinking in physics, that out of nothing two things appear, a particle and an antiparticle that when combined become nothing.

So you have nothing, then two things, then nothing.

You can even get several particles all at once, but never a single one, just as this can be happening simultaneously ...

Thus for your tautology to be true the "First Thing" has to be nothing.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by nano, posted 10-29-2016 7:29 AM nano has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022