A Simplified Proof That The Universe Cannot Be Explained

Where do you propose that somewhere would come from?

God Bless,

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,

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.

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,

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,

In Message 1

Sure sounds like he is talking about something that had no cause to exist that existed that is responsible for all that there is.

But if I understand his argument it is that whatever caused the universe to exist can not be explained.

Therefore since the first cause can not be explained the universe can not be explained.

If you remember I have stated several times in the last six years that whatever caused the universe to exist would be God.

Whether it was what I call God, or the God particle, or Hawking's instanton, that entity had to be able to produce all the energy required to create and power everything in the universe that we can see and no telling what we can't see.

God Bless,

Yes he does use the phrase that the entities he mentions is included in the universe which makes his entire argument nonsense as none of them could exist until the universe existed. Therefore they could not cause the universe to exist.

The entities he talks about would have to exist outside of the universe to be able to cause the universe to exist.

God Bless,

Yes that has to be the scientific answer.

But the Bible tells us God created the heavens and earth in the beginning.

I know the scientific community does not like to give any credence to the Bible but at present it is the only book that tells us how it began to exist and why we are here.

God Bless,

In Message 54 you said:

In Message 60 you said:

In Message 81 you said:

So where am I incorrect when I say?

So are the entities you mention inside of the universe as you agreed with kbertsche as to being your position which you are arguing in the posts I quoted above.

Or, are they outside the universe as you now claim your statement in the OP that "universe = multiverse"?

Why do you keep stating, "the first thing in the universe cannot be explained" if you allow for things to be outside of the universe.

The standard theory does not allow for anything to be outside of our present universe as it was a self contained unit that was expanding one billionth of a second after T=0.

What existed at T=0? No one knows as the math's don't work there.

As I have said several times over the past 9 years whatever created the universe and everything in it had to be able to supply enough energy to create the mass in the entire universe.

Whatever entity that could produce that much energy would be God.

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. That would require existence of space in which the vacuum could exist.

Insert multiverse at this point. That would provide a place for the branes to exist and bang together.

But energy cannot be created so we would not exist today if the multiverse hypothesis was correct. As the useable energy would now be all converted to unusable energy. Therefore there would be no energy to create the mass required for our universe. Thus since this would have been going on for an eternity the universe that run out of usable energy would be a dead universe.

The same thing applies to Hawking's instanton.

Existence would have to exist for the universe to be able to exist.
Then there would be something for the universe to expand into.

Whatever that entity was that existed prior to our universe would be responsible for creating the universe.

That entity would have to be outside of the universe without a cause to exist, therefore an eternal entity, outside of time as we know it.

You can call that entity anything you want to call it. I prefer to call that entity God.

Science cannot explain the existence of the universe.

God can and does explain the existence of the universe.

God Bless

I actually thought a vacuum was space devoid of matter.

But according to nano quote from OP

quote:

---

for my purposes the term universe = multiverse = all of existence.

---

Back to real Multiverse's.
But if the math don't work before T=0 + 1 trillionth of a second how can multiverse's ever be considered a hypothesis must less a theory ?

Alan Guth's pipe dream of a free lunch.
Inflation was necessary to solve the horizon problem, the flatness problem and the magnetic monopole problem.

Problems created by inflation.
What started inflation?
What caused it to stop?
During the time of inflation the expansion was faster than the speed of light, how is that possible?
What caused the expansion to slow down?
What caused expansion to be speeding up today?

Whatever caused our universe to begin to exist would have to exist prior to the universe beginning to exist. It would have to be outside of the universe and uncaused whether it be God, the God particle, two branes banging together or Hawking's instanton.

This sentence erases the empty universe of #1 as there is no thing before it not even an empty universe.

Had he said the first thing in the universe had no cause since there was nothing before it. He would have been repeating the OP.

The problem with that is that the universe already existed.

The OP could have been much clearer.

I feel like a cat chasing his tail.

God Bless,

You sure failed at keeping it simple.

Where did the empty universe come from?

But you have an empty universe already existing so there would be something before the first thing in the universe.

According to you it already existed which would make it be a uncaused entity.

Since according to the OP the empty universe existed it could not have existed for eternity or maybe you can explain how it could.

God Bless,

I think I understand what you want your argument to be.

But you want to start off with an empty universe.
That means you have something existing that you call an empty universe.

My question to you was where did that empty universe come from?

Now if you want to say existence existed eternally in the past, I could go along with that. Then later things, including the universe existed in that existence.

But no you say:

Universe exists but is empty.
How does an empty universe measure zero?

How can you have an empty universe and there be an absence of existence?

You can't. Because you have something that exists.

Since you have something that exists eternally it is explained as an eternal entity that has no cause.

Just give me the facts, as I search for the truth.

My point is that science and the Bible speak to the heavens and the earth beginning to exist.

Science can not explain the existence of the Universe.
The Bible does explain the existence of the Universe.

God Bless,

Why is the null set necessary to have something existing?

The quote box is there which means something exists, a quote box.

God Bless,

But you were presenting the quote box as the first thing just like nano's empty universe.

Existence is what is required for anything to exist, or begin to exist.

God Bless,

So if there is non existence there is no way for anything to begin to exist.

Isn't that nano's reason for having an empty universe that can fill up with things?

But since he has an existing empty universe in his proof the universe can be explained.

It would be an uncaused eternal entity.

God Bless,