Norman Samish wrote:

>"Why is there something rather than nothing?"
>When I heard that Famous Question, I did not assume that "nothing" was 
>describable - because, if it was, it would not be "nothing."  I don't think 
>of "nothing" as an empty bitstring - I think of it as the absence of a 
>bitstring - as "no thing."
>Given that definition, is there a conceivable answer to The Famous Question?

It's always easy to answer a hard question with a question. So here are 
possible answers:

Why not?


One could equate everything with total absence of information = nothing. 
So we get: "Why is there something rather than everything?" That 
question can be answered by invoking the Anthropic Principle.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to