It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Universe Creating Itself From Nothing

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs
The question then becomes "Where did the membrane come from, how was it created?"

I doubt that we'll ever understand or know the answer to these questions. We can however find entertainment in speculation.




posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:28 AM
link   
nothing is in counterpoint to something, and every thing.
without everything, nothing is not a valid concept.
so, when the universe did not exist, it had to negate it's non-existence to not violate cosmic logic.


edit on 000000110931119America/Chicago27 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hammaraxx
a reply to: Barcs
The question then becomes "Where did the membrane come from, how was it created?"

I doubt that we'll ever understand or know the answer to these questions. We can however find entertainment in speculation.


Time doesn't exist outside of our universe, so the membranes would have always existed in a timeless state. No reason to assume because something exists it was created or needs to be. Then of course you have the universe cyclical model where the universe is basically in an infinite loop of expanding and contracting.

There is no reason to think these things came from nothing. Any source materials for the universe or singularity would HAVE to be eternal/timeless, since time and laws of thermodynamics don't exist until a big bang expansion has started. Theoretically, membranes / dimensions would have had infinite "time" to form or get to the point where a big bang expansion started. Time isn't really a thing, it's just an illusion caused by the expansion of the universe and gravity.




edit on 11 27 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:33 AM
link   
purely conceptual realms, are not nothing,
but do not exists physically.
the universe arose by virtue of the possibility that it could.

I quite like Ein Sof as a metaphor for this ineffable question.
edit on 000000110940119America/Chicago27 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: rom12345
nothing is in counterpoint to something, and every thing.
without everything, nothing is not a valid concept.
so, when the universe did not exist, it had to negate it's non-existence to not violate cosmic logic.


I respectfully disagree with you there.
Any idea that can be conceived is a valid concept true or not. You may have difficulty conceptualising a state of pure nothing but some of us can.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs
Can you imagine a state of absolutely nothing?
The possibility that creation was actually creation?
I'm seriously asking, because I can.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: rom12345
purely conceptual realms, are not nothing,
but do not exists physically.
the universe arose by virtue of the possibility that it could.

I quite like Ein Sof as a metaphor for this ineffable question.

Awesome!
Thank you for linking that.

It is the origin of the Ohr Ein Sof, the "Infinite Light" of paradoxical divine self-knowledge, nullified within the Ein Sof prior to creation. In Lurianic Kabbalah, the first act of creation, the Tzimtzum self "withdrawal" of God to create an "empty space", takes place from there.

The "withdrawal" in the idea I have given is the Negatrine reaching/traveling back in time into the "empty space" therefore initiating creation.

You've given me a new path to investigate.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hammaraxx
a reply to: Barcs
Can you imagine a state of absolutely nothing?
The possibility that creation was actually creation?
I'm seriously asking, because I can.


I cannot imagine nothingness, it's impossible.

Creation is a creation sounds a bit redundant. Do you mean the universe is a conscious intelligent creation? I could imagine that, but don't think it's very probable. If you do that, you basically move the goalposts because all same questions we raised about the universe origin, something from nothing, how it got there apply to the creator.

Nothing wrong with asking. I'm finding this fun.


edit on 11 27 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs


It seems I have a stalker!

Perhaps you can elaborate on some more hokey pseudo science for us?



eternal source materials for the universe.

Or are you just gonna throw fits and call names in this thread as well?

Something not so biased all the time would be nice. Maybe
how no current materialistic theory of evolution accounts for the origin
of the information necessary to build a single life form?

Try not to be angry!


edit on 27-11-2019 by carsforkids because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:54 AM
link   
It's not impossible Barcs.
Some of us can imagine such a state.
Obviously we can't create, draw or otherwise represent it you can only use imagination to perceive it.
I am often amazed at the products of other people's imagination, thinking to myself I could never have imagined that. All the same, they did.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:56 AM
link   
If there is a something in a higher dimension than it would be a nothing in 3d Space. Some theorist say that gravity originates from higher dimensions.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 09:58 AM
link   
being able to imagine nothing
would be like not being able to do so.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: rom12345
being able to imagine nothing
would be like not being able to do so.

I didn't say it was easy.
Kind of close to the ultimate goal of meditation, but a clear mind is not what I mean.

If you can describe it, you can imagine it.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   
I can only imagine "nothing" in terms of what it is not.
Some believe, that In a physical universe, we can not have knowledge beyond the event horizon of a black hole.
No hair theorem, seems to limit any observable parameter.
So any understanding of nothing, must be purely conceptual, which is in it's self "nothing",
or is it ?
edit on 0000001110171110America/Chicago27 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hammaraxx
It's not impossible Barcs.
Some of us can imagine such a state.
Obviously we can't create, draw or otherwise represent it you can only use imagination to perceive it.
I am often amazed at the products of other people's imagination, thinking to myself I could never have imagined that. All the same, they did.


To be fair, you said "imagine," you didn't say understand what it means as a hypothetical concept. If you can imagine it, you can visualize what that would be like, and it's literally impossible to imagine what nothing is, because the second you imagine that it is no longer nothing. What picture comes to your mind? Total darkness? Is that not something? Nothing is absence of everything, thus is impossible to imagine even if you THINK you can imagine it. You really can't.

edit on 11 27 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: carsforkids

So once again you completely ignore the points and blindly dismiss me out of emotion.

Do you EVER provide substance in your posts or just continuously take shots in the dark hoping you eventually hit a target? Almost everything you post is disinformation. It's not cool.



edit on 11 27 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: rom12345
I can only imagine "nothing" in terms of what it is not.
Some believe, that In a physical universe, we can not have knowledge beyond the event horizon of a black hole.
No hair theorem, seems to limit any observable parameter.
So any understanding of nothing, must be purely conceptual, which is in it's self "nothing",
or is it ?


From the link you provided earlier:

The Zohar explains the term "Ein Sof" as follows:

Before He gave any shape to the world, before He produced any form, He was alone, without form and without resemblance to anything else. Who then can comprehend how He was before the Creation? Hence it is forbidden to lend Him any form or similitude, or even to call Him by His sacred name, or to indicate Him by a single letter or a single point...

Yes, conceptual.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs
Actually, I think you are doing quite well imagining a state of nothing from the descriptions you have written.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs


I thought it was fine to ask questions and is this word (dumbass)
your way of being cool?

So it's disinformation to say any " sources " of new form and structure
must precede the action of natural selection'?

Natural selection can only act on what already exists?

I said it = Disinfo.

Isn't it true that there is no mechanism that can produce innovations in form and complexity.?

I suppose you might say we were made in the image of evolution regarding the
origination of our biological form?
edit on 27-11-2019 by carsforkids because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Hammaraxx

The problem is that there’s no such thing as nothing. Only relatively.
Physics even knows that the empty space is not empty


I showed you, though, that relatively speaking there is something called NO THING




top topics



 
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join