Thread replies: 13
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
"ex nihilo nihil fit"
WHY?
If there's nothing (not even natural laws like causality or conservation of mass)
what would prevent something from just appearing?
Is there anything except our apish intuitions that tells us that "from nothing nothing comes", just because we don't see it happen in our daily lives?
>>
>>895031
Ask /sci/ about quantum fluctuation.
>>
>>895049
I don't see how that relates to what I asked though. In this hypothetical nothing, there'd be no quantum mechanics, or anything else operating at all. Or at least thats what the religious argue to then posit a prime mover thingy. I'm asking why that would be needed.
>>
>>895031
there never was nothing.
nothing is just a figure of speech.
>>
nothing is not nothing
nothing in physics is zero, the idea for the big bang is more like the 1st law of thermodynamics
>>
File: secret of lels.jpg (588KB, 1000x950px) Image search:
[Google]
588KB, 1000x950px
Nothing is more powerful than god, so worship Nothing instead.
>>
>>
>>895328
>>895390
I'm not saying there MUST have been a nothing, but thats the religious argument for the neccessity of a god though.
They say things need a first cause, because otherwise there'd be absolutely nothing.
And since nothing can come from nothing, yada yada.
I'm asking, why?
Why can't something just randomly appear from nothing, if no laws exist to prevent it.
Meaning, that argument for a god is blatant nonsense, isn't it?
>>
"Nothing" cannot even exist according to modern physics.
Things were just very different during the big bang.
"Something from nothing" is a creationist argument.
>>
>>897267
I agree, defining anything from nothing and drawing conclusions is playing wordgames with broken concepts.
But, this whole "nothing can come from nothing" is still widely accepted in religious circles as a valid argument.
I'm asking if my specific refutation of it makes sense within the religious framework, and what the religious reply would be to that.
>>
>>897259
So the existence of the universe needs to have been caused by something, but the thing that caused it didn't need a cause? This argument makes no sense.
>>
>>897300
Uh.. thats the religious argument, yes. It can't have caused itself therefore god, the uncaused cause. But I am trying to refute that argument here, I'm not supporting it.
I'm asking what the religious reply would be to "something can totally come from nothing, because what exactly would be there to stop it"
>>
>>895049
>QF breaks conservation of mass
No it doesn't. Stop saying this.
Thread posts: 13
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2