/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15950489
Because.

>>15950489
I don't know

>>15950489
If there was nothing, there would be nothing stopping something from being.

>>15950489
this is the most fearsome question that strikes terror into any high IQ

>>15950493
If nothing was nothing, something would be something from nothing, nothing. There IS something because something... Something, nothing. You choose.

>>15950489
I'd unironically go ask /x/, this one is their speciality.
/sci/ can only model what does exist, to a certain extent.

>>15950489
If there was only nothing you wouldn't be able to ask that question.

>>15950504
the anthropic principle only explains why I'm asking the question, it does not answer the question.

>>15950493
This, no natural laws means arbitrary shit happens until long lasting natural laws just pop up and regulate further happenings.

>>15950489
Selection bias. Only in universes that exist is this question possible.

>>15950509
Indeed. Without laws, everything is permitted.

>>15950512
Law and Beauty are opposites.

>>15950489
Because the subquantum fields that enable everything might not even have an origin, they could have always existed which breaks all logic as we know it

Free will. The universe came into existence by the power of its own free will. Free will is acausal, making the transition from nothing to something.

>>15950535

>>15950532
Not really we have dealt with eternal and infinite b4

Well, there can't only be "nothing" because nothing and something are in a metaphysically dyadic relationship with one another. You can no more say that a universe with "nothing" in it exists than you could a universe where "big" exists but not "small".

The metaphysical laws of all reality everywhere forever stipulate that nothing can't exist in isolation, and neither can "something" exist independently of nothingness. Now, those nerds at CERN have actually discovered that there can be alternating patterns of nothing and something coming into and out of being across space-time ... which means that there can be nothing for an eternity minus 1 pico second, and something for an eternity minus 1 pico second, but they have to alternative across time no matter what.

So, the metaphysics of reality dictate that our universe is riding the wave of "somethingness" until it collapses into nothingness and then somethingness explodes back into being at the last moment that the last physical object decays into non-being.

>>15950532
>>15950535
These 2 comments were formed when a normal comment split into 2 quantum entangled particles. One the Comment[+] particle, with basis, brains, reason, math, and science; one the Anti-Comment particle[-] with idiocy, mysticism, lunatic romantic philosophy.

If the 2 comments touch each other, they will annihilate.

>>15950568
Those two comments are literally saying the same, dipshit.

>crypto theist thread

>>15950489
I don't know. Nobody knows. My guess is that one day we will know though. We might not individually find the answer, even after we die, but i think so long as humans exist there will be people trying to find out why. After all, isn't that the end game of science, to understand how and why about everything? Maybe it will take a billion years of technological advancement to discover why, but i don't see why it would be impossible to work it out

>>15950658
My theology is not naming anything from theology and let logic and science run is course

Eventually they arrive to prime mover and get stuck trying to deny theology

High level metaphysics answer is that this *is* nothing.

>>15950509
But time itself IS something. Likewise, natural laws ARE something. You cannot invoke a soup of random stuffs (even if abstract stuff), to explain why there is ANYTHING AT ALL to begin with. Your position is sheer absurdity, You presupposing some stochastic, abstract-evolutionary process misses the point that you presuppose SOMETHING in order to try to account for why SOMETHING exists to begin with.

>>15950738
Time is probably consciousness, bro.

>>15950489
no reason

>>15950855
chad universe

>>15950489
So you could suffer

Prove there's something.

That's right - you can't. Fag. Stop shittin up sci

>>15950861
Are we in the Roko Basilisk sim?

>>15950868
you are in no sim. it's cheaper to run you on efficient hardware.
>but I'm important and somebody would dedicate enormous amounts of power to simulate me
>but I'm important and aliens want to come here and study me then kill me
>but I'm important
>I matter god damn it