Nothing can't come from something!

Ahnimus

We often here people say 'Something can't come from nothing!'

Likewise nothing can't come from something. No matter how you slice energy, it is always there. You cannot make energy non-existent. It follows that energy has always existed and thus solves the problem. A theory that at some point nothing existed is a paradox. The simplest answer is most likely the correct answer.

baraka

Ahnimus wrote:

We often here people say 'Something can't come from nothing!'

Likewise nothing can't come from something. No matter how you slice energy, it is always there. You cannot make energy non-existent. It follows that energy has always existed and thus solves the problem. A theory that at some point nothing existed is a paradox. The simplest answer is most likely the correct answer.

The point of Occam's razor is not that there is any a-priori reason why "the simplest explanation is more likely to be the true explanation" but rather that the simplest explanation can be more quickly disproven than a complicated reason- and that's the whole point of science.

Ahnimus

Is that not a perfectly logical statement though?

Should 'we' not typically align ourselves with the simplest explanation?

onelongsong

Ahnimus wrote:

We often here people say 'Something can't come from nothing!'

Likewise nothing can't come from something. No matter how you slice energy, it is always there. You cannot make energy non-existent. It follows that energy has always existed and thus solves the problem. A theory that at some point nothing existed is a paradox. The simplest answer is most likely the correct answer.

nuclear fission???

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Ahnimus wrote:

We often here people say 'Something can't come from nothing!'

Likewise nothing can't come from something. No matter how you slice energy, it is always there. You cannot make energy non-existent. It follows that energy has always existed and thus solves the problem. A theory that at some point nothing existed is a paradox. The simplest answer is most likely the correct answer.

I've trying to explain this to people for ages. You can always cut a piece of something in half down to the atomic level and beyond and always have a piece of something left to cut in half again. At no point can you ever have nothing....apply this onwards to infinity.

The state of nothing does not exist..

This was always here....bubbling, broiling, supernova-ing, over and over again on scales of magnitude completely unimaginable...and will continue to do so forever. No beginning...no end. Just the state of "is".

baraka

Ahnimus wrote:

Is that not a perfectly logical statement though?

Should 'we' not typically align ourselves with the simplest explanation?

It's not a logical conclusion, it's a search strategy. Occam's Razor is not meant to be absolute, or a law in the sense of always being correct, or anything approaching an ultimate answer, it is just a principle, therefore it need not be 100% logically applicable in the same way Sod's law isn't technically a law or applicable, and in fact it's an example of fallacious conclusion from poor understanding of probability, well it would be if anyone took it seriously.

But any way.

All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one

Note the use of the word tends, not is, not is always but tends.

onelongsong

Ahnimus wrote:

We often here people say 'Something can't come from nothing!'

Likewise nothing can't come from something. No matter how you slice energy, it is always there. You cannot make energy non-existent. It follows that energy has always existed and thus solves the problem. A theory that at some point nothing existed is a paradox. The simplest answer is most likely the correct answer.

the simplest answer would be that God made it.

chadwick

if everything is in the universe.
then also nothing is something.
my lil wit @ physics.
like a black-hole has nothing inside it.
yet it is pulling apart gravity, or contorting all energy and time.
a heaviness beyond crushing of knowledge.
this is something in nothingness.
does a black-hole have color or a shade of colored tones?

norm

Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin'
If you wanna be with me
Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin'
If you wanna be with me

I'm not tryin' to be your hero
'Cause that zero is too cold for me, Brrr
I'm not tryin' to be your highness
'Cause that minus is too low to see, yeah

Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
And I'm not stuffin'
Believe you me
Don't you remember I told ya
I'm a soldier in the war on poverty, yeah
Yes, I am

instrumental break

Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin'
If you wanna be with me
Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin'
If you wanna be with me

You gotta have somethin'
If you wanna be with me
You gotta bring me somethin' girl
If you wanna be with me

RolandTD20Kdrummer

chadwick wrote:

if everything is in the universe.
then also nothing is something.
my lil wit @ physics.
like a black-hole has nothing inside it.
yet it is pulling apart gravity, or contorting all energy and time.
a heaviness beyond crushing of knowledge.
this is something in nothingness.
does a black-hole have color or a shade of colored tones?

A black hole is a dense sphere (a ball essentially) floating on space with gravity so strong not even light particles can escape from it. You wouldn't be able to see color with a black hole as that requires light to bounce off it and into your eye. Light would reach it but be ripped apart into gamma and Xrays...which are even smaller and faster moving particles. They move too fast for our eyes to see them, basically because our atmosphere filters them out so we never developed the the ability to visualize them. Light particles are bigger and have more mass so they move slower so we can see. We can thank our sun for this.

Very cool stuff black holes. All they are is a sphere of extremely dense compacted matter (and consequently with extreme gravity). Matter compressed from the violent energy release of a supernova. Pressed star cores really.

They are part of the universal recycling process... small particles are sucked in and reduced to infinitely small then shot back out to recombine into larger things (elements, suns, planets, etc) and boom super nova the process starts over again elsewhere eventually.

surf the "event horizon" sometime...it's a mind bender with regards to entering it from a time perspective

.

chadwick

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

A black hole is a dense sphere (a ball essentially) floating on space with gravity so strong not even light particles can escape from it. You wouldn't be able to see color with a black hole as that requires light to bounce off it and into your eye. Light would reach it but be ripped apart into gamma and Xrays...which are even smaller and faster moving particles. They move too fast for our eyes to see them, basically because our atmosphere filters them out so we never developed the the ability to visualize them. Light particles are bigger and have more mass so they move slower so we can see. We can thank our sun for this.

Very cool stuff black holes. All they are is a sphere of extremely dense compacted matter (and consequently with extreme gravity). Matter compressed from the violent energy release of a supernova. Pressed star cores really.

They are part of the universal recycling process... small particles are sucked in and reduced to infinitely small then shot back out to recombine into larger things (elements, suns, planets, etc) and boom super nova the process starts over again elsewhere eventually.

surf the "event horizon" sometime...it's a mind bender with regards to entering it from a time perspective

.

thank you for your time spent on this.
i knew this.
i was trying to state something but i guess i wasnt very clear.
a black-hole they say is out of control gravity, yada yada, yada..
ok, shredding apart everything that gets sucked into it.
yet no color is alive inside one.
is no color a black type tone of shade?
or is black, or can solid emptiness and mind bending gravity be colorless as in blackened shaded tones.
nothingness is colorless yet to us that is the deepest black to our understanding.
sheer mass of a black-hole is pure madness.
and i believe it is everything and nothing all at once.

FinsburyParkCarrots

Ahnimus wrote:

We often here people say 'Something can't come from nothing!'

Likewise nothing can't come from something. No matter how you slice energy, it is always there. You cannot make energy non-existent. It follows that energy has always existed and thus solves the problem. A theory that at some point nothing existed is a paradox. The simplest answer is most likely the correct answer.

Ever read King Lear? If you have, you'll know why I'm asking.

ClimberInOz

onelongsong wrote:

the simplest answer would be that God made it.

I am afraid not. God, the creator, must be more complex then what is being created. Therefore, instead of having to explain the origins of the universe, we now need to explain the origins of the more complex god- making god not the simplest answer...

ClimberInOz

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

I've trying to explain this to people for ages. You can always cut a piece of something in half down to the atomic level and beyond and always have a piece of something left to cut in half again. At no point can you ever have nothing....apply this onwards to infinity.

The state of nothing does not exist..

This was always here....bubbling, broiling, supernova-ing, over and over again on scales of magnitude completely unimaginable...and will continue to do so forever. No beginning...no end. Just the state of "is".

I agree with this, except that there is a finite limit to how small you can divide the universe, known as the planck scale (1.6 x 10 ^-35m), beyond which the universe cannot be divided.

I too believe that 'nothing' is only a concept of the human brain. We see no evidence of nothing in this universe- even the purest vacuum is alive with quantum fluctuations.

Given this, I also agree with the original poster when he says that something cannot come from nothing. This is of great significance to the origins of the universe, because it leaves us with two leading possibilities to explain the origins of the singularity that expanded to become our current universe.

Either the singularity was born from a timeless base, and time formed with the creation of the universe. Or alternatively the universe as we know it today is just one fluctuation in an eternal cycle of matter rearranged- and our singularity was possibly formed inside another universe.

Of course, there is a lot of speculation with ideas like these at the moment and not a lot of science to back them up- but hopefully continued study of the early conditions of the universe will give evidence to our origins.

sicnevol

ClimberInOz wrote:

I agree with this, except that there is a finite limit to how small you can divide the universe, known as the planck scale (1.6 x 10 ^-35m), beyond which the universe cannot be divided.

I too believe that 'nothing' is only a concept of the human brain. We see no evidence of nothing in this universe- even the purest vacuum is alive with quantum fluctuations.

Given this, I also agree with the original poster when he says that something cannot come from nothing. This is of great significance to the origins of the universe, because it leaves us with two leading possibilities to explain the origins of the singularity that expanded to become our current universe.

Either the singularity was born from a timeless base, and time formed with the creation of the universe. Or alternatively the universe as we know it today is just one fluctuation in an eternal cycle of matter rearranged- and our singularity was possibly formed inside another universe.

Of course, there is a lot of speculation with ideas like these at the moment and not a lot of science to back them up- but hopefully continued study of the early conditions of the universe will give evidence to our origins.

You know what a planck is!!! I love you for that.


Also to the first poster. Occam's razor is the worst law you could us in that point....

RolandTD20Kdrummer

chadwick wrote:

thank you for your time spent on this.
i knew this.
i was trying to state something but i guess i wasnt very clear.
a black-hole they say is out of control gravity, yada yada, yada..
ok, shredding apart everything that gets sucked into it.
yet no color is alive inside one.
is no color a black type tone of shade?
or is black, or can solid emptiness and mind bending gravity be colorless as in blackened shaded tones.
nothingness is colorless yet to us that is the deepest black to our understanding.
sheer mass of a black-hole is pure madness.
and i believe it is everything and nothing all at once.

Theoretically if you were to slice into one I'm guessing it would be shiny as core's of stars are Iron. However with the type of energies involved the Iron may become an entirely new substance?! not sure... Einstein thinks theres no matter just energy... but that's impossible I think. Something has to be there... All matter in the universe is structured around a nucleus or core entity

Let's hope CERN can get a glimpse very soon...

RolandTD20Kdrummer

ClimberInOz wrote:

I agree with this, except that there is a finite limit to how small you can divide the universe, known as the planck scale (1.6 x 10 ^-35m), beyond which the universe cannot be divided.

I too believe that 'nothing' is only a concept of the human brain. We see no evidence of nothing in this universe- even the purest vacuum is alive with quantum fluctuations.

Given this, I also agree with the original poster when he says that something cannot come from nothing. This is of great significance to the origins of the universe, because it leaves us with two leading possibilities to explain the origins of the singularity that expanded to become our current universe.

Either the singularity was born from a timeless base, and time formed with the creation of the universe. Or alternatively the universe as we know it today is just one fluctuation in an eternal cycle of matter rearranged- and our singularity was possibly formed inside another universe.

Of course, there is a lot of speculation with ideas like these at the moment and not a lot of science to back them up- but hopefully continued study of the early conditions of the universe will give evidence to our origins.

CERN's latest and greatest big bang machine should be firing up any time now.

I think the Plank scale is not entirely reality. It's my guess, but I don't believe a nothing condition can possibly exist. Ultimately there has to be a "loop" condition where it's cyclical...or perhaps the dimensions just keep going on forever. It could also be at the Plank constant you enter the next dimension in scale of magnitude...

I look at it this way...2 conditions can exist...Empty universe or full universe. i.e Something or Nothing. That's a no brainer. In order for nothing to be truly nothing...it can never be something at any point in time, otherwise is was never truly nothing to begin with. Deep concept but it's simple really.

The state of nothing to me is an impossibility as we are here. The universe is full.

I really need to be high for this....

Ahnimus

onelongsong wrote:

the simplest answer would be that God made it.

haha, no that's the most wishful answer.