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.

 

What If There Was Simply NO Beginning?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by nicolee123nd
 


Just a thought....


"In the beginning, there was nothing", yet this makes no sense, because "nothing" is impossible.


Hang on a second, "Nothing" has to be something, or you would not be mentioning the word "Nothing"...

We often we say there is "Nothing" in there or he/she said nothing, or there is nothing between the walls etc.

"Nothing" has to be "Something", otherwise we would not be able to recognise this Component called "Nothing", when we see there is "Nothing" in the bottle or cup or whatever.

Essentially, we are like comparators, so there would have to have always been a pair of components !

Perhaps "Nothing" & "Something" (which is nothing) if you can get my drift?

You will find this the case, if you dig deep enough. The reason that all is a "Paradox", is because all is based on the "Opposites" hence what we call the "Geometric Paradox Algorithm" all is based on.

The component called “Nothing” is the most mysterious and least understood of all.

"Nothing", can also have shape, which is defined by the boundaries of the Vessel this "Nothing" is in.

WE use the word "Nothing" when in fact identifying a void, as in the case of being empty, and often vessels can be said to be empty, or have nothing in them.

For a vessel to have "Nothing" it it, or contain "Nothing", suggests that "Nothing" is in fact "Something", otherwise how can it, being "Nothing", be Contained or be in it, the Vessel" ???

What makes this "Nothing" so weird, is because it consists of 2 Components, and it is impossible to separate them.

a. "Something" (Identifiable)
and
b. "Nothing" (also Identifiable) which is something.

So really "Nothing" can and does exist.

If only “Nothing” existed it is also, “Something” i.e. nothing.... LOL

This being the case there can't be a beginning.

It is only the Universe, which is a Story involving "Interactive Geometry" which can start and end.
Regarding energy it is only a "Component" of the Universe or "Story" and not necessarily a Component of anything else.
The reason I refer the Universe to be a Story, is because a "Story" is in the form of History.... LOL

It is all a bit of a fickle isn't it?

We need to look from outside the Square.





edit on 19-12-2010 by The Matrix Traveller because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-12-2010 by The Matrix Traveller because: add word...




posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I believe science and religion both agree that 'everything' came about from a single instance for lack of a better explaination. Both have theroies as to how it happened, but I believe it all comes from the same cloth. I believe that modern scientific theory is persuing the possibility that our 'everything' came about by some sort of collision with other universe(s), but it obviously just a loose thoery as of now. Personally, I think it's more plausable that our/the universe simply expands and collapses from the inconcievably small to the unimaginably large again and again...

Having said all of this, I think it's even more plausable that despite our scientific understanding based on theory atop of theory as to how the universe came about, I have a feeling the actual truth of the matter is far beyone any comprehention and will most likely remain so. No matter how hard you try to teach a turtle quantum physics, it simply will never learn it. It's too far beyond it's possible comprehention. And we as humans must come to the realisation that it's possible too that certain things are just too far beyond our comprehention to ever truely understand. However, I have little doubt that we will continue to 'make it work' as far as understanding withing the parameters of what we can comprehend. But is that truth? No, it's science...
edit on 19-12-2010 by HomeBrew because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by jacktherer
 





This is exactly why some form of higher power must indeed exist or must have at one point existed. Whether or not it was christian god though is up for debate. Here is my reasoning: even if the universe was simply just here all along, no creation or big bang or anything, how did it get here? and where exactly is here? Are you suggesting that the chicken indeed came before the egg?


The multiverse never "got" here, it was just there. And there is no location, it takes up and infinite amount of space; there in no limits. It's just about impossible for the human brain to grasp this (yes, mine too), but its still possible.
edit on 19-12-2010 by nicolee123nd because: kejbfiu



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by nicolee123nd
 


Just a thought....


"In the beginning, there was nothing", yet this makes no sense, because "nothing" is impossible.


Hang on a second, "Nothing" has to be something, or you would not be mentioning the word "Nothing"...

We often we say there is "Nothing" in there or he/she said nothing, or there is nothing between the walls etc.

"Nothing" has to be "Something", otherwise we would not be able to recognise this Component called "Nothing", when we see there is "Nothing" in the bottle or cup or whatever.

Essentially, we are like comparators, so there would have to have always been a pair of components !

Perhaps "Nothing" & "Something" (which is nothing) if you can get my drift?

You will find this the case, if you dig deep enough. The reason that all is a "Paradox", is because all is based on the "Opposites" hence what we call the "Geometric Paradox Algorithm" all is based on.

The component called “Nothing” is the most mysterious and least understood of all.

"Nothing", can also have shape, which is defined by the boundaries of the Vessel this "Nothing" is in.

WE use the word "Nothing" when in fact identifying a void, as in the case of being empty, and often vessels can be said to be empty, or have nothing in them.

For a vessel to have "Nothing" it it, or contain "Nothing", suggests that "Nothing" is in fact "Something", otherwise how can it, being "Nothing", be Contained or be in it, the Vessel" ???

What makes this "Nothing" so weird, is because it consists of 2 Components, and it is impossible to separate them.

a. "Something" (Identifiable)
and
b. "Nothing" (also Identifiable) which is something.

So really "Nothing" can and does exist.

If only “Nothing” existed it is also, “Something” i.e. nothing.... LOL

This being the case there can't be a beginning.

It is only the Universe, which is a Story involving "Interactive Geometry" which can start and end.
Regarding energy it is only a "Component" of the Universe or "Story" and not necessarily a Component of anything else.
The reason I refer the Universe to be a Story, is because a "Story" is in the form of History.... LOL

It is all a bit of a fickle isn't it?

We need to look from outside the Square.





edit on 19-12-2010 by The Matrix Traveller because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-12-2010 by The Matrix Traveller because: add word...


Interesting concept, Matrix Traveller. I must ask though if you were referencing the idea that when one says that "Nothing" is "Something"...you are saying it is "NO THING" and if it is No Thing...No Thing can't be something.

No Thing is complete and utter emptiness. When one does not think paradoxically, and can conceive of the option of "only now" one will understand that there isn't anything fickle about the concept at all. It is all so simple...but then, the easier something is, the more difficult it becomes, that's the usual cop out.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by VeniVidi
 





I just can't comprehend that anything has no beginning. It just seems to me that everything has to have a start somewhere.


And neither can I, and neither can any other human being. Because that's simply how it is on out puny planet, and that's all that we know. But we're not talking about earth, we're talking about the multiverse, which is very much beyond what our brains are adapted to understanding -- but that doesn't matter as long as you want to believe it.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Finally! Something that actually makes complete sense, so everybody can agree to disagree on creation.

But one question still remains, how old is the lack of beginning? How old is the universe? I still have a very hard time wrapping my mind around infinity, it's way to big of a concept for any one brain to even begin to chip away at.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I have heard of this in some show. It's called a Steady State Universe which was supposedly popular in the mid 20th century.



In cosmology, the Steady State theory (also known as the Infinite Universe theory or continuous creation) is a model developed in 1948 by Fred Hoyle, Thomas Gold, Hermann Bondi and others as an alternative to the Big Bang theory (known, usually, as the standard cosmological model). In steady state views, new matter is continuously created as the universe expands, so that the perfect cosmological principle is adhered to. The steady state theory of Bondi and Gold was inspired by the circular plot of the film Dead of Night, which they had watched together. Theoretical calculations showed that a static universe was impossible under general relativity, and observations by Edwin Hubble had shown that the universe was expanding. The steady state theory asserts that although the universe is expanding, it nevertheless does not change its appearance over time (the perfect cosmological principle); it has no beginning and no end.

Steady State Theory



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   
The only place you can find "nothing" is in the dictionary and even there it is just a label to describe a concept. Empty is not the same as nothing, having the contents removed or not filled yet does not equate with nothingness. Even antimatter does not qualify, it is a negative therefore a something. Real nothing cannot exist because anything and everything would displace it.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Holly N.R.A.
 

I understand your reasoning.

But.....
Referring to your statement. Quote;


No Thing is complete and utter emptiness.


Found here…

en.wikipedia.org...


Nothing is a concept that describes the absence of anything. Colloquially, the concept is often used to indicate the lack of anything relevant or significant, or to describe a particularly unimportant thing, event, or object. It is contrasted with something and everything. Nothingness is used more specifically as the state of nonexistence of everything.


Here refers to "Nothing" being a Concept.
It is a Concept it therefore exists as a "Concept".

And as we now Concepts exis, and don’t contain anything, except an Idea…. LOL

And this is Nonmaterial and Nodimensional... Yet Exists.


It is just like that thing called Nothing…. LOL

Is it just our (humanity) inability to understand, which dictates our definition of the word "Nothing" ???

As you said yourself…


No Thing is complete and utter emptiness.


Yet this concept of Nothing exists…. LOL.

Emptiness has Dimensional, existing in a both a 2D world i.e. there is nothing on the surface !

If the Surface exists then there being Nothing on the surface says that Nothing does exist and it is Present on the Surface or Face… LOL

And because it exists in 2D we find the Case in 3D etc. etc.


And another dictionary explanation…

dictionary.reference.com...

Quote;

no thing; not anything; naught: to say nothing.
2.
no part, share, or trace (usually fol. by of ): The house showed nothing of its former magnificence.
3.
something that is nonexistent.
4.
nonexistence; nothingness: The sound faded to nothing.
5.
something or someone of no importance or significance: Money is nothing when you're without health.
6.
a trivial action, matter, circumstance, thing, or remark: to exchange a few nothings when being introduced.
7.
a person of little or no importance; a nobody.
8.
something that is without quantity or magnitude.
9.
a cipher or naught: Nothing from nine leaves nine.
10.
(used in conventional responses to expressions of thanks): Think nothing of it. It's nothing. Nothing to it.
–adverb
11.
in no respect or degree; not at all: It was nothing like that. Nothing dismayed, he repeated his question.
–adjective
12.
amounting to nothing, as in offering no prospects for satisfaction, advancement, or the like: She was stuck in a nothing job.
—Idioms
13.
for nothing,
a.
free of charge.
b.
for no apparent reason or motive.
c.
futilely; to no avail: They had gone to a great deal of expense for nothing.
14.
in nothing flat, in very little time: Dinner was finished in nothing flat.
15.
make nothing of,
a.
to treat lightly; regard as easy.
b.
to be unsuccessful in comprehending: He could make nothing of the complicated directions.
16.
nothing but, nothing other than; only: We could see nothing but fog.
17.
nothing doing,
a.
Informal . emphatically no; certainly not.
b.
no activity, inducement, advantage, etc., present to the eye: We drove through the town but there seemed to be nothing doing.
18.
nothing less than / short of, absolutely; completely: She was used to nothing less than the best.
19.
think nothing of,
a.
to treat casually.
b.
to regard as insignificant: He thinks nothing of lying to conceal his incompetence.

Makes One wonder, doesn't it ?

I mean do we really want to understand or Not ???
edit on 20-12-2010 by The Matrix Traveller because: spelling



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 





We often we say there is "Nothing" in there or he/she said nothing, or there is nothing between the walls etc. "Nothing" has to be "Something", otherwise we would not be able to recognise this Component called "Nothing", when we see there is "Nothing" in the bottle or cup or whatever.


When I say "nothing", I'm speaking in a sense of material, so saying "he/she said nothing" wouldn't prove anything in this case, as would saying something like "He got her nothing for her birthday".

But there is something in between the walls! And there is something in the cup! There ought to be air - oxygen, carbon dioxide, and any other gases that may be lingering - as well as microscopic materials within the walls or cup. I could hold out a supposedly empty hand, and you might want to tell me that there's nothing in my hand, but in reality there are many, many things in my hand, such as oils, microscopic materials, and the gases making up the air surrounding the hand.

So there technically no such thing as "nothing". All material cannot be destructed, nor destroyed, so it makes no logical sense as to say that there was once "nothing", and all of a sudden "something" pops up.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 


A concept isn't a nothing, it is a refined idea that has been created from previous knowledge and expressed or recorded in some form or fashion. Nothing is not any dimensional, no length, breadth or height, it has no time, no space not even atomic structures. A nothing cannot have gravity, radiation or movement. It cannot be surrounded by anything. The fallacy is misuse of the word "nothing" in place of a more accurate desciptor. Your example, "there was nothing on the table" is less accurate than there "wasn't anything" on the table. The nothing excludes the atmosphere, pressure, dust, stains, polish, wax, stains, etc. Anything presupposes an object with form.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by debris765nju
 


That is your interpretation and that is your right...

You wrote quote;


A concept isn't a nothing,

Sorry I didn’t say that.... you have misunderstood me.

Here are the words quoted again by en.wikipedia.org...
Not my words but those of wikipedia...Quote;


Nothing is a concept that describes the absence of anything. Colloquially, the concept is often used to indicate the lack of anything relevant or significant, or to describe a particularly unimportant thing, event, or object. It is contrasted with something and everything. Nothingness is used more specifically as the state of nonexistence of everything.


If there is an absence of something, we usually referring to being as within something, even in an explanation.

My words again... (referring to the above text) Quote;


Here refers to "Nothing" being a Concept.


I see my next words that I am Not clear though (I apologise)... Quote;


I is a Concept it therefore exists as a "Concept".

My poor English I guess I appologise.

I should have written…

If the Component or Noun, “Nothing” is a Concept, according to wikipedia and that Concepts exist, then because the Noun “Nothing” is a Concept it then must exist i.e. as a “Concept”.

If such a thing (as Nothing) does Not exist, why have such a word in the dictionaries then ???
I hope this is a little clearer.

Example... If we draw a circle, there is nothing in the circle, if there was something in it, it would be called a Disc and Not a circle…

So there is a difference between a circle and a disc isn' there ???
So what is it that defines the difference between the 2 ???
Is the presence of "Nothing" in the circle which makes it a circle, wheras the disc has something in a circle thus making it a Disc ???
Is this Not the case ???

________________________


Try this.... Show an empty cup to a child and ask the child using these words...

“What is in the cup ???”

I can guarantee the child will answer,

"Nothing"

Then ask the child using these words,

"What shape is it???"

I can guarantee the child will answer,

"Round".

Strange ???



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by nicolee123nd
 



But there is something in between the walls! And there is something in the cup! There ought to be air - oxygen, carbon dioxide, and any other gases that may be lingering - as well as microscopic materials within the walls or cup.


This only confuses the “Concept” of “Nothing” by over engineering the Concept as it depends on what you are relating this “Nothing” to.

…. And if it were in a perfect Vacuum (If a perfect Vacuum is obtainable dependant on the available technology) then what is their ???
"Nothing" of course….
And it has shape, decided by its boundaries, controlled by the Outer Component i.e. the Container, the vacuum is in.

The Container of what ???
The Vacume.... Oh you mean "Nothing".
Ah what "Nothing" is contained in.... called a Vacuum....

Sometimes when a child is scared of the dark, relating to their bed room we say,
Don’t be scared of the Dark as there is Nothing there.”

We don’t say there is only gasses in your room …. LOL
Well when my grand children were little, I never said that to them. I would say instead,
“Don’t be scared of the Dark there is Nothing there.”

If we draw a circle, there is nothing in the circle, or it would be called a disc and Not a circle…


Try this…..

Show an empty cup to a young child and ask the child, using these words...

What is in the cup ???”

I can guarantee the child will answer,

"Nothing"

Then ask the child using these words,

"What shape is it???"

I can guarantee the child will answer,

"Round".

If we ask an adult quite often you get the same answers and when you point it out to them they are often very surprised as they had never given it any thought before.

On the other hand if I ask the same to another adult, they don't give me a list of all the "gases", "tide markes", "finger prints", "humidity" Shadows etc. and all that do they ???

And I have found very few refer to the cup as being empty but I admit these very very few do say, "empty"...
perhaps only 1 in a 100... if that.

Remembering that the English language is a very recent language, perhaps 450 to 500 years old or there about, and depending on where you are in the world the use of words differs.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by debris765nju
The only place you can find "nothing" is in the dictionary and even there it is just a label to describe a concept. Empty is not the same as nothing, having the contents removed or not filled yet does not equate with nothingness. Even antimatter does not qualify, it is a negative therefore a something. Real nothing cannot exist because anything and everything would displace it.


The definition of Empty.... Quote;

dictionary.reference.com...


adjective, -ti•er, -ti•est, verb, -tied, -ty•ing, noun, plural -ties.
–adjective
1.
containing nothing; having none of the usual or appropriate contents: an empty bottle.
2.
vacant; unoccupied: an empty house.
3.
without cargo or load: an empty wagon.
4.
destitute of people or human activity: We walked along the empty streets of the city at night


Its a strange old world isn't it ?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 


Quoting from from the same source...........—Synonyms
1. vacuous. Empty, vacant, blank, void denote absence of content or contents. Empty means without appropriate or accustomed contents: an empty refrigerator. Vacant is usually applied to that which is temporarily unoccupied: a vacant chair; three vacant apartments. Blank applies to surfaces free from any marks or lacking appropriate markings, openings, etc.: blank paper; a blank wall. Void emphasizes completely unfilled space with vague, unspecified, or no boundaries: void and without form. 6. delusive, vain. 12. unload, unburden.
Thank you for proving my point. The list of synonyms does NOT contain nothing so they must be different. Nothing cannot be empty, it cannot be full nor can it be anything in between; a half empty bottle is never though of as a half nothing bottle........its as obvious as the face under your nose. Curious huh?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by debris765nju
 


That is your interpretation and that is your right...

You wrote quote;


A concept isn't a nothing,

Sorry I didn’t say that.... you have misunderstood me.

Here are the words quoted again by en.wikipedia.org...
Not my words but those of wikipedia...Quote;


Nothing is a concept that describes the absence of anything. Colloquially, the concept is often used to indicate the lack of anything relevant or significant, or to describe a particularly unimportant thing, event, or object. It is contrasted with something and everything. Nothingness is used more specifically as the state of nonexistence of everything.


If there is an absence of something, we usually referring to being as within something, even in an explanation.

My words again... (referring to the above text) Quote;


Here refers to "Nothing" being a Concept.


I see my next words that I am Not clear though (I apologise)... Quote;


I is a Concept it therefore exists as a "Concept".

My poor English I guess I appologise.

I should have written…

If the Component or Noun, “Nothing” is a Concept, according to wikipedia and that Concepts exist, then because the Noun “Nothing” is a Concept it then must exist i.e. as a “Concept”.

If such a thing (as Nothing) does Not exist, why have such a word in the dictionaries then ???
I repeat, Nothing is not a concept, that is not to say there are not concepts about "nothing." Obviously there are a multitude of concepts about nothing but that does not make them "nothing." Now to respond to your question as to why we would have a word like nothing in the dictionaries? My thought is perhaps the invention of the numerical null number "zero." I understand what you are saying, you express yourself well. I just enjoy exploring misunderstood ideas that have become an accepted "truth" through slang and misuseage.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:02 AM
link   
As a Christain just my thought according to Genisis In the Beginning refers to the beginng of creation or at least the creation of this universe God unformed unmade uncreated had no beginning he always was alaways is and always shall be. the phraise in the beginning expains the first cause of all things as it regards creation created the heaven and earth could be translated heavens and earth because God created the entirety of the universe. And the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep. God did not originally create the earth without form or void it became that way after a cataclysmic happening this happening was the revolt of lucifer against God which took place sometime in the dateless past. And the spirit of God moved upon the face og the deep the moving of God siginfied the beginng of life



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   
I've always been a subscriber to fanciful ideas like Universes being the "other side" of a black hole, or the Big Bang Big Crunch infinite cycle. In the latter case, the "proto-matter"/singularity left over after the "Big Crunch" would be the spark for the "next" Big Bang.

In a sense, at least in the latter case, it always was and always will be, although in entirely different states and densities.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:42 AM
link   
reply to post by debris765nju
 


Yea I get your Point...

Perhaps in what I am trying to explain, another Word should be used, but what I don't know so this is why I refer to it as “Nothing”...

Following others who use the word in the way I have….

The English language is too restricted at times.... LOL.

Perhaps there is no word for it and requires one to invent another word for this....

Unless you have any sugestions ???



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
The logical points to explore are the conditions under which "NOTHING" can exist. Identifying a place devoid of absolutely everything including surroundings. Nothing should be considered absolute, a singularity that can only exist alone. A void, avoid. What allows it to not be? Nothing would be a hole in a spatial universe., perhaps the birth canal for a new universe. What do you think?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join