[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 591 KB, 2682x2196, Structure_of_the_Universe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171362 No.4171362 [Reply] [Original]

Why is there existence? Why do things exist?

Why is there an universe and just not nothing?
Why are physical laws exactly the way they are?
Why did extremely complex things just evolve out of fucking nowhere?
Why?

This shit blows me mind.

>> No.4171365

philosophy yo

but na gtfo

>> No.4171366

let me answer your questions with another question:
why the fuck not?

>> No.4171368
File: 141 KB, 1363x1023, saturn.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171368

because you think that all of those things are true

>> No.4171370

>>4171368
Aren't they?

>> No.4171371

MULTIVERSE

/thread

>> No.4171376

>>4171366
Because if there's nothing it's hard that somethings starts to exist.

>> No.4171377

Why? Because God lol

>> No.4171381

Why did things start to exist?

>> No.4171382

>>4171370
No

>> No.4171385

>>4171376
When there is SOMETHING it's hard for another something to flash into existence. When there is nothing there is no reason why it wouldn't happen.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

>> No.4171387

>>4171376

Why do you assume nonexistence is more natural than existence? Why should it be the default?

>> No.4171399

>>4171387
That's the question.
What's the default? Existence or non-existence?
And if it's existence: WHY?

>> No.4171403

>>4171377
Nope

>> No.4171405
File: 211 KB, 393x591, 1317250769480.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171405

Maybe there just always was. Just like there doesn't have to be an end and something can stretch into infinity, why does there have to be a start?

>> No.4171406

People who are constantly asking 'why' are like tourists, who stand in front of a building, reading Baedeker, & through reading about the history of the building's construction etc etc are prevented from seeing it.

>> No.4171411

Lol atheists you mad nothing makes sense but as soon as there's a God everything can be explained.
Brotip: It was good who created everything and also nothing.

>> No.4171413

>>4171399
Non-existence isn't simply a vacuum. It is the complete lack of physical laws. Why wouldn't something exist in nothing? In our universe we have the conservation laws. Without those laws there is no reason why stuff couldn't just "flash" into existence.

>> No.4171414

>>4171411
>good created everything
Seems legit.

>> No.4171415

>>4171362
Your questions are nonsensical and shit. Are you 12? 14?

How about you rephrase them...SO THEY MAKE FUCKING SENSE!

>> No.4171420

maybe this is what nothing looks like

>> No.4171422

>implying things are ever created
>implying they don't come into being as a result of another's existence

>> No.4171424
File: 151 KB, 600x399, openpt003-11.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171424

>>4171415
hahaha clueless faggot

>> No.4171425

>>4171420
No, there definitely is something.

>> No.4171431
File: 11 KB, 220x275, 220px-Einstein1921_by_F_Schmutzer_4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171431

>>4171362
From the wording of your questions, it is obvious you don't know shit about shit.

I am not gonna take my time to try and explain every fucking thing to you. I will answer (explain) one of your questions. That is all.

Which one do you want?

>> No.4171438

>>4171415
Maybe because my English sucks.
>feelsbadman

>> No.4171443

>>4171362
OP something exists instead of nothingness existing because nothingness can't exist because its existence poses a paradox. Quote this post if you want more info.

>> No.4171441

You ask 'why' as if there is a reason/purpose/justification for existence. The path to a teleological excuse for God. Why must there be a purpose, why not just existence?
Existentialism!

>> No.4171444

Things exist because we perceive it to be.

>> No.4171445
File: 17 KB, 400x323, winner.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171445

>>4171441
>>4171441
\thread

>> No.4171447
File: 1.86 MB, 1644x1144, 1317868651526.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171447

Everything always existed. Ever.

You're experiencing this moment because every moment from every perspective is being experienced at the same time.

You are infinitely meaningless.

>> No.4171448

>>4171431
Answer my first question plox, kind sir.
>Why is there existence?

>> No.4171449

Why is there OP? Why does he exist?

Why do people like him think these types of questions are at the cutting edge of philosophy?
Why do they think that anyone cares about the answers to these pointless questions?
Why do they think that no one else has already tried to answer these questions for thousands of years and have moved on to more important and interesting stuff?
Why?

This shit blows my mind.

>> No.4171457

>>4171443
No, if there's no existence there's nothing and nothing isn't an existence, nothing doesn't exist.

>> No.4171465

Maybe something HAD to exist and we just witnessed the start.

>> No.4171471

There has to be a point where existence start to exist. Or did existence always exist for an infinite period of time?
How does this work?

>> No.4171474

Reality is a self-referencing function.
> You are a derived form -- i.e. you were derived from something that preceded you -- key concept here --> inheritance, therefore you inherit the properties of what preceded you (i.e. it existing).

>> No.4171480

>>4171449
What's the point in caring about anything, does it matter what one cares about or looks for answers for?

>> No.4171482

>>4171480
If you've ever studied philosophy, you'd realize these types of questions aren't "deep" or anything like that.

>> No.4171484

You are that existence asking why it came to be.

>> No.4171487

>>4171482
Who cares if they are deep or not?
>hurr deep questions I'm cool and edgy

>> No.4171489

>>4171482
my point is, nothing truly matter in the scheme of things, because there is no scheme, it all seems pointless. Yet I made a point, go figure.

>> No.4171490

"Non-existance" is just a word, or in this case, a couple of words connected by a hyphen. Its not a characteristic of the universe. The question is not "why" but "how". In the simplest terms, Non-existance (of the universe)... doesnt exist.

And shame on you for taking advantage of all these good sci folk who aren't old enough yet to know this kind of stuff.

>> No.4171492
File: 12 KB, 261x301, 1288646481137.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171492

>>4171482

>> No.4171494

>Why

there's your problem, think how thinks happen, that can become the why. but the true initial conditions are can never be known.

>> No.4171499

Existence is a less ordered state than nonexistence. Entropy guaranteed that a uniform state of quantum fluctuation would collapse into the universe by way of particle pair division.

>> No.4171500

GUISE
Guise what if...
what if every person percieves colors in another way and that's the reason why favorite colors exist?
Like one has red as his favorite color and the other blue but in fact they are the same or something?

>> No.4171517

>>4171490
>mfw existance is not a word.

>> No.4171518

>>4171500
philosophical mutants

http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~phils4/mutants.html

>> No.4171522

Sometimes i just want to walk away, The sad thing is people think the universe have meaning. They think there actions echo. Everyone dies alone. Death is pointless. So is life.

But there is hope. We are part of the universe, billions of years of physics and chemistry resonate inside of us. We breathe in the universe all the time. We were not intended nor were we expected. But we exist, The universe is masive and impossible to understand, Be happy, You are a part of the universe. I hope to live and experience. I enjoy the stimuation, Yet i take comfort in the fact that some day i will be part of the system. Its so hard to understand, So what have i done? I let go. So should we all, Just losen up. Everything we feel is important really isnt, Just relax. Go for a walk, Walk 100 miles. Take a plane to hawaii and never come back. Dont pay taxes. Walk around naked. Do it now. It wont matter what anyone feels in the long run, So why not die happy? Then become part of the universe, Release yourself into the blackness, But do so with clarity and satisfaction.

>> No.4171533

You can't answer 'why existence?' because there is no context for existence. Existence is the context. To answer why you need to be able to look at two things and make a comparison of sorts. An answer to 'why existence?' would be something like: "well there's this thing that is existence and this other thing and we can see that next to this other thing, the purpose of existence is ______". But there is no other thing.

>> No.4171536

>>4171490
Exactly. Asking why the universe exists is like asking why 2+2=4 and the answer is "because that is its nature". (now I know we can prove 2+2 so not the best analogy but you get my point)

>> No.4171539

>>4171518
So it's like NPCs (=zombies) and players (=mutants)?
I had the exact same idea before.

>> No.4171547

Two sides of the same coin.

When all we have is nothingness, time is also not present. It's like asking how long did it take for nothingness to be something? It's a meaningless question.

At the same time, say things continue existing for a trillion of a trillion of a trillion googolplex years. How long is that compared to the infinite time before and after existence? Nothing.

Our brains are very limited in that sense. We can mathematically and logically understand that things can be finite or infinite, but our "guts" tell us it's wrong. Existence and non-existence are different, but equal, contraditory but complementary. The space between two things that exist is always empty and the space between two nonexistant place is always filled with something that exists. I'm not talking about scientific notion of space, but a more abstract one, you could change it with time or even compare it to the relationship of people.

Think about it like this: how likely is it for something to be? If there is an infinite "sleeping" things and also an infinite time for them to spark into being, how can we measure it? What we take as being is just a reflection, a point of view, a spark in itself. Everything must finally fall one day.

>> No.4171551

>>4171517
I think he said "just" a word, not "not " a word.

>> No.4171560

"Why not?"

>> No.4171566

Feynman on "why questions"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMFPe-DwULM

Lawrence Krauss: 'A Universe From Nothing'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo

Who is the master who makes the grass green?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY5r_zox-a8

>> No.4171574

>>4171362
God did it.

srs

>> No.4171588

>>4171399
i think what he means is, why is there change if there was nothing to cause this the change why didn't it stay the same the deeper question is what caused the change and then everyone hurrs, troll religion thread general

>> No.4171590

we exist to ask these questions. The universe exists to facilitate the existence of beings whom ponder its its existence.

>> No.4171595

>>4171588
yeah, the remarkable simple answer is:

God did it.

>> No.4171596

>>4171588
Answered earlier. Existence is a less ordered state.

>> No.4171598

>>4171596
less ordered than nothing?

lulz

your nothing has too much something in it

>> No.4171600

>>4171598
Yes. Nothing is perfectly ordered as measured by consistency. Existence has a net energy of zero. It's merely disordered nothingness. Look it up.

>> No.4171605

>>4171420
the idea of nothing is the deepest of mind fucks, for example
nothing does not exist
sounds retarded however
nothing wouldn't look like anything it wouldn't be there, for there to be a nothing there first has to be something for that nothing to exist in such as space, otherwise

>> No.4171606

>>4171600
so, a proton and an electron are less ordered than no proton and no electron?

lulz

>> No.4171608

>>4171566
Nice vids.

>> No.4171610

>>4171605
Plenty of mathematical concepts are just concepts with no real world equivalent. Zero included.

>> No.4171612

>>4171605
maybe....nothing used to exist....and then....something existed.....and then......you existed

because is something always existed, we have a problem accounting for

universe

y u no heat dead?

>> No.4171613

>>4171606
Yes.

>> No.4171616

>>4171613
that's quite a leap of faith there....to say that things that counteract each other are less complicated than their absence.....

you sure you have a grip on reality?

>> No.4171621

>Why is there existence? Why do things exist?

>Why is there an universe and just not nothing?
>Why are physical laws exactly the way they are?
>Why did extremely complex things just evolve out of fucking nowhere?
>Why?

they simply ARE
that's the most scientific explanation i can come out with
everything else is bullshit

>> No.4171626

>>4171616
It's only a leap of faith if one has no evidence. What I am talking about is young, but well supported science. Earlier in the thread someone posted "A Universe From Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss. It contains all the supporting facts you could ask for.

>> No.4171640

>>4171522
>They think there actions echo
>there

>> No.4171642

>>4171626
i have a much older, first-hand account how the universe came from nothing..... no offense

>> No.4171652

>>4171522
sorry, but you have no hope, none whatsoever. just false hope. one of the most significant distinctions you can make is the difference between real hope and false hope.

if there is no God, there is no hope; conversely, if there is a God, there is hope.

many of you want to believe there is no God, so that you can be your own gods, and judge yourselves. good luck with that. oh, and there is no hope in that; you are simply self-delusional.

>> No.4171655

>>4171642
As I suspected, your motivation for rejecting scientific findings is religious in nature. I wish you could see how unsurprised I am.

Tell me, provided these findings are repeatedly vindicated by further studies, in what way will your denial of them differ substantially from a creationist's denial of evolution?

>> No.4171675

>>4171652
You say "be your own gods" as if to accuse us of arrogance. But are you arrogant for wanting to be your own master, and not enslaved? That's the proper comparison. You are trying to shame people for not willingly submitting to your imagined master.

I don't imagine I could become a god. I don't think the concept of gods makes much sense and it is clearly an invented one. I am subject to judgement, but by laws, and my fellow men. Same as you.

>> No.4171678

>>4171655
in no way whatsoever, as i am a young earth creationist who denies that evolution explains my existence

it's great for tracing back boxers and rottweilers, but wholly inadequate to answer the big questions

if it's good enough for you, though, please be my guest and continue to think you came from, well, anything you like. it matters not. once you, as the created, lose your relationship with the Creator, all else is meaningless

>> No.4171681

>>4171518
>http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~phils4/mutants.html
I always ask that question, thanks

>> No.4171684

>>4171675
not at all; i am a servant of the most High God, not a god myself. however, i did find a path that leads to God, and took it, much in the same way a condemned man takes a pardon from the governer on the eve of his execution.

it is not a thing to brag about, but to be humble and meek, as my Lord is humble and meek, against all of my preconceptions

>> No.4171688

>>4171362

God did it. And Jesus Christ died for our sins.

>> No.4171691

>>4171362
Why can't be answered scientifically.

/thread

>> No.4171692

>>4171688
indeed, especially in that Jesus did it.

>> No.4171695

>>4171691
so, abandon science when it fails in your search for truth, and use other tools, like revealed knowledge from a higher power

it's really not that complicated, much in the "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's"

>> No.4171702

>>4171678
You missed the point and did not answer my question. I acknowledge you are not a creationist. I asked in what way you substantially differ, given that you deny scientific findings for religious reasons just like they do.

If you do not directly and fully address this in your next reply I can only conclude that you have no rebuttal and are cornered. Take this opportunity to reflect on the implications of your inability to defend your worldview. Perhaps I am being a dick, but isn't it also true that if your religion was correct it would stand up to such scrutiny and would not require science denial?

>> No.4171704

>>4171606
don't you mean proton and positron just sayian

>> No.4171710

/sci/ - philosophy and religion

>> No.4171714

>>4171613
no there's energy which although that was all there originally was it isn't 'nothing'

>> No.4171716

>>4171702
i thought i made it quite clear. perhaps you thought i was being sarcastic. i am a young earth creationist who takes the bible quite seriously and quite literally.

part of that is knowing that Jesus is the truth; in that way, i have no fear of ever learning any truth that would lead me away from Jesus. in a manner of speaking, i love the truth at least as much as i love Jesus, and i never have to fear that He is going to somehow lead me astray.

these people you believe; can you honestly say the same about them?

>> No.4171717

>>4171695
Revealed knowledge is just stuff people make up. It has never provided knowledge of physics or medicine or any such topic we did not have at the time. If it were genuine we would expect it to produce usable principles for new medicines and technologies not arrived at by science, but it never has, because it's just guys making shit up, like Joseph Smith's "revelations".

>> No.4171727

>>4171704
no, as they do not cancel each other out, charge-wise, which is what i was looking for

it's like getting punched in the left kidney, and punched in the right kidney, and saying you are in less pain than if you had never been punched at all

>> No.4171731

>>4171716
As you have revealed yourself to be a YEC I am no longer interested in discourse with you. You have abandoned reality entirely. I do not believe any productive exchange of ideas with you is possible. Please refrain from all efforts to infect school children with your disorder.

>> No.4171737

>>4171717
some is, some isn't, and some is traceable to a source unlike the claimed source, as in your example. i think it is pretty clear that satan deluded joe smith, not "moroni", as no true angel would ever tell a man that Jesus and lucifer are brothers

>> No.4171740

>>4171727
sorry meant electron and positron

>> No.4171742

>>4171727
Look at it like adding -1 and 1 to get 0. Now do it in reverse. Presto, 'something' from 'nothing'. Matter (1) and antimatter (-1) from nothing (0). Like digging a hole in a flat surface and getting a hole and a pile.

>> No.4171747

>>4171731
i understand, and point out that closing off discourse, not looking at all the evidence, ad hominem attacks, and general denial are the traits most common in people holding your position, and not mine

>> No.4171753

>>4171742
which equation is more complicated:

1-1=0

or the equation under this line?
___________________________________
see?

>> No.4171758

>>4171688
amen

>> No.4171763

>>4171747
The reason we close off discourse with you is because you have been proven wrong repeatedly for centuries, but never concede. And as proven by the information uncovered by the Dover trials, you dinky hesitate to lie outrageously if you think it will benefit your goals. You are tenacious, unreceptive to reason, dishonest and refuse to acknowledge evidence contrary to your beliefs. You should be ashamed, but you're not.

You accuse me of not being open to the evidence. But in this very thread, it was you, not me, who ignored the evidence presented.

>> No.4171766

>>4171753
No, I don't. Do you have a peer reviewed study backing up your analogy? I do.

>> No.4171767

>>4171740
aye, and what is easier to put into a jar, a positron and an electron, or nothing?

which is more complicated, a positron and an electron, or nothing?

aren't these childish questions easily answered properly?

>> No.4171771

>>4171763
Dinky should read "don't". Fucking autocorrect.

>> No.4171775

>>4171362
things exist because of the begging of time
Evolution happend, things were created, everything was created on a simple basis
everything has mass, atoms, protns, nuetrons, etc
things are here because god put his finger on a blackboard and said "go"
starting the evolution of earth
but stars and god and time space continuum have been here forever

>> No.4171779

>>4171763
so, in a nutshell, your issue is the teaching of evolution only in school, and react violently with any suggestion that intelligent design, i.e., creationism, is taught in school.

in the 1800's, that position was untenable, and would be widely rejected by substantially each and every american alive then.

now, it is the default position of the human secularist movement, a quasi-religious movement intent on pushing God out of the public square.

you are the agenda driven poster here, not i; i still search for truth, and you have a hidden agenda

>> No.4171783

>>4171766
i've never been as impressed by forever alone circle jerks as you seem to be; and without God, the concept that something came from nothing used to be discredited

next you'll be touting snake oil and phlogiston, i expect

>> No.4171788

>>4171775
stars don't have enough in them to burn forever; we have a pretty good idea, based on current consumption, when our own star will burn out

so, that position is scientifically implausible

>> No.4171794

>>4171767
seeing as nothing doesn't exist and is deep mind fuck to define

>> No.4171798

>>4171794
i'm unclear on the distinction between "nothing does exist" and "nothing does not exist"

>> No.4171805

>>4171779
You ignore again that between us, it was you that rejected the evidence presented. That speaks volumes.

There has never been any violence over intelligent design. That was a loaded and inappropriate word to use. The reason scientists are on guard against it is because it is untrue and persistently snuck into curriculums anyway. As seen in yourself, it fosters an anti-science attitude where people simply dismiss any facts not consistent with their religious beliefs. And these attempts have been going on for decades. That's an incredible nuisance, which is why it is treated as such. The motivation is not bias against god, as even Christian scientists overwhelmingly accept evolution and oppose creationism in the science classroom, yet you don't acknowledge that fact nor it's implication. Even your own co-religionists, within science and academia (aka the best educated) have concluded that evolution is correct. Yet somehow, possibly due to legendary dunning krugerism, you cannot even conceive of the possibility that you're simply wrong about this one thing and the reason people oppose you isn't a massive conspiracy but because you're factually wrong and trying to replace truths with falsehoods in children's educations.