figuer

No, it is saying that there were no prior, causal antecedents from which x could have come, thus x never came into being.Which means that its antecedent is 'nothing'.

Hedshaker

No one knows anything about existence before the Big Bang. No one at all.

An infinite, ever changing, universe makes far more sense to me than one that popped into existence from nothing.

figuer

Yes, a quick read is a good idea.

Dante Alighieri

Why would you say that? There are no, for instance, antecedents conditions for a beginningless thing either. If your argument actually works, it disproves the existence of anything at all, since either there is a beginning or not. If there was a beginning, according to you, since there are no antecedents, it came from "nothing." If there isn't a beginning, then by definition there are no antecedents either, so there can't have been a beginning. So, your argument, if successful, disproves the existence of either being a beginning or not; which is incoherent.

The crucial flaw is that you treat "there are no antecedents" as an antecedent, which is plainly incoherent (and you even make that incoherence explicit by saying that no antecedents is an antecedent). "No antecedents" is not an antecedent of anything, so your entire argument is predicated on an equivocation.

Timetospend

But is there any data to show that the Big Bang is an initial event? Does quantum cosmology do away with the need for cause, or does it (greatly) complicate it? It was not totally clear to me where your intended statements of fact left off, and your intended statements of conjecture started. (Perhaps you explained all of this elsewhere, but if so, I do not know where.)

I read through your material. Interesting speculation, but slight on supporting data. For example, you might need to define an/the initial event or indicate whose definition that you are using. Please notice that I used an indefinite article, as a natural inquiry would be to identify if new universes are now being created, perhaps even within our own.

Thanks,

figuer

Are you sure? I only said "it never came into being", not "it doesn't exist". Isn't this what you are arguing, that it never came into being, but simply is?The statement seemed paradoxical, yet made perfect sense, thus it was not incoherent. It is perfectly logical to say: If nothing antecedes initiation, then the antecedent of initiation is nothing. It only becomes incoherent when the mind errs in ascribing 'somethingness' to the second 'nothing'.

RAFH

Ah, no, Genesishopper. It is just BB was such a catastrophe, no useful information survived. Everything was reduced to a basic energy state. So, it is not that nothing existed previously, but that no information about whatever that was exists. It is irrelevant.

It is like a series of games, each new game starts fresh, with no history. All contestants start with the same score, 0. That applies whether it is the first game or the 10th game. The events in the previous game are of no consequence.

This may or may not be the reality, but it is the current standard model. It may be there are entities which survived BB. Doesn't seem likely at this point, but there have been many things that haven't seemed likely at some point or another.

In any case, BB was not necessarily a 'beginning', as in the start of everything with no previous existence, but for us, it was a restart of the clock and it is likely we will never be able to access any information before it. So, for all practical purposes, it was the beginning.

RAFH

Santa.

And his workshop and all the elves.

And Mrs. Claus as well. She's a hottie, despite what anybody might say.

RAFH

Makes perfect sense to whom? You? Are you the arbiter of perfect sense? I sort of doubt that as for all practical purposes you appear to be just another person.

Frankly, I agree with Dante, and find your statement is incoherent. So, what do we do, take a poll? Reality doesn't exist by popular opinion. At least not the one I live in.

figuer

Not when reduced to a mathematical equation. The seemingly incoherence comes from its verbalisation.