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.

 

Something from Nothing

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Hello. This is my first thread and I thought about what topic that I could learn from.

This is not a thread to explain something. I am looking for answers and there seems to be a lot of bright, free thinking, individuals on here who might be able to spread some light on the subject.

The question is this. How do you get something from nothing?

I have pondered this question countless times and have come to the conclusion that without a maker nothing can be made.

I am interested in your thoughts on the subject. Thank you for taking the time to answer.




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Nothing in the sense is the absent of something, so nothing in itself is false.

There is something everywhere you look and do not look, just because you do not see it, hear it, understand it, does not mean there is nothing there.


Show me a place where there is 100% nothing and I will show you the same place is full of 100% something. Example, you say there is nothing in this one inch by one inch box, I say by you acknowledging that one inch by one inch box it is something.

Make sense? think I may have confused myself.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Conclusion
 

I assume you are getting at creation versus evolution. In which case, if you want to think about this critically (I mean, really think about it), you have to get rid of the idea of "made." You're right, you can't have something "made" without a maker, but the universe, from a scientific perspective, is NOT made, and so doesn't need a maker.

Hope that helps...



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


But according to scientific theory it was made in the big bang.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by suomichris
 


But according to scientific theory it was made in the big bang.

No, see, you have your thinking wrong here. This isn't the way scientists think about it. The universe wasn't "made" in the big bang, the universe arose out of the big bang. I know it sounds like I'm playing semantics, but I'm really not.

Think of a pot roast, left outside in the hot sun for a week, until it is totally full of maggots. It is wrong to say that the pot roast "made" the maggots, but not to say that the environment of the pot roast lead to the maggots, that the maggots arose out of eggs laid on the pot roast. (Okay, not the best analogy, but I think you get the idea...)



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Conclusion
 

The more i think on it science says the universe had a big bang and is going to have a big crunch. Has it always been like that. If so then that is forever. The bible said that God is Alpha and Omega, The beginning and the End. Is that not saying the same thing?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


With that assumtion and i might not be looking at it right, is to say that outside of the big bang there was something that would interfere to a point on the big bang



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
hehe the OP is making the assumption that "something" had a definite beginning and in turn will have a definite end.

I look at it as an eternal now, it has always been there and will continue to be there.

Just gotta wrap your head around it.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by phi1618]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


Just another question. You might be able to explain it or not, but i dont know the answer. Now with the big bang. It had to be comparable to an atom in size, i am not sure about that part, but if it was then where did all the material come from. was there that much material in the atom and it was just compressed? That would also be viable.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by phi1618
 


I am starting to look at it the same way



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
I suggest you read the Dao De Jing by Laozi.

THe questions which you are asking cannot yet be answered in scientific terms, so you must look at it philosophically.

you may find some good insight and wisdom within its pages.



[edit on 14-7-2009 by phi1618]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by phi1618
 


Now Eternal is broad subject. As 3 dimensional objects it is hard to think about, let alone understand. How could there be change in eternal though? Everything would be the same thing. Hmmm, yeah hard to get your head around.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by phi1618
 


How old is the book?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Wiki (Dao De Jing) aka Tao Te Ching aka "the way"

An old Daoist text

I believe it predates the bible by some 500 years.

Its a series of poems, but they have alot of wisdom in them.





[edit on 14-7-2009 by phi1618]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by phi1618
 


I often find it amazing how the ancients knew the mind better than most today.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by suomichris
 


With that assumtion and i might not be looking at it right, is to say that outside of the big bang there was something that would interfere to a point on the big bang

Not necessarily (although it may well look that way from my rather poor analogy!).

The truth is, there is still a lot of mystery around the big bang. This is because, as the universe came into being and the matter and energy and such were arising/settling in/etc., so were the laws of the physical universe. Because our understanding of the physical universe is based on these laws, it is difficult to extrapolate back to a point at which these laws didn't hold. There is some progress being made on this, especially with quantum physics, but we certainly don't know all the answers.

Frankly, I think you can believe in a certain kind of god and still have confidence in science. Sure, god kicked off the universe, and maybe even tweaked the laws to get a universe where we can live...



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
Hello. This is my first thread and I thought about what topic that I could learn from.

This is not a thread to explain something. I am looking for answers and there seems to be a lot of bright, free thinking, individuals on here who might be able to spread some light on the subject.

The question is this. How do you get something from nothing?



Ahem. Well, I think that in order to have something, anything in a physical sense, you have to have something to begin with. Nothing can exist because it is, well, nothing. One step on, nothing can be made from nothing.

The old question: 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?' is typically impossible to answer because without one, you simply cannot have the other. If it were as simple as asking why the chicken crossed the road, the answer would be much easier: 'To prove to the opossum (substitute 'armadillo as it suits you) it could be done.'

No... with out something, you have nothing and with nothing, you can have nothing from it.

Physically speaking, of course.

...



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by suomichris
 


Just another question. You might be able to explain it or not, but i dont know the answer. Now with the big bang. It had to be comparable to an atom in size, i am not sure about that part, but if it was then where did all the material come from. was there that much material in the atom and it was just compressed? That would also be viable.

Honestly, I'm not sure what the current "state of the art" has to say on this. But, keep in mind, the physical laws of the universe arose after the big bang; what kind of state they were in before isn't really known, I don't think. If we take quantum theory into account, it might (MIGHT!) be better to think of the origin of the big bang being an area of potentiality, and not actually a little ball of matter as such.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


I believe something like that also. Science is trying to figure it out. But to do that i also think that you have to think spiritually too. You cant solve the whole puzzle with just half of the puzzle.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by suomichris
 


I believe something like that also. Science is trying to figure it out. But to do that i also think that you have to think spiritually too. You cant solve the whole puzzle with just half of the puzzle.

Well, science has gotten pretty danged far without the need to consider a spiritual dimension. Now, that's not to say that there isn't a spiritual dimension, necessarily, but only that, if it exists, it is separate from the physical universe in such a way that the physical world can be understood without.

Now, will we need a spiritual dimension to understand the big bang? Maybe, but I'd rather let science have a full go at it first, given its track record...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join