On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:47 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 1/31/2012 8:43 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > Regarding the "philosopher's nothing": > > This present moment exists, and it has no cause since our universe is a > four dimensional structure (time is a subjective phenomenon). This > timeless existence of this moment establishes that "nothingness" cannot > exist. In short: It is an impossible state. The question then becomes: > "Why should this present moment exist, and what else might also exist?" So > far, the answer suggested by our latest discoveries and reasoning suggests: > a lot. > > Jason > > > Or to paraphrase Quine: What is there? Everything. So what isn't there? > Nothing. > > Brent > I don't quite agree with that paraphrasing. My point was that there is no such thing as a philosopher's nothing, not that everything exists. Such a leap would require the additional assumption that "Nothingness" is only thing that does not exist. All I said was that "nothingness" is an impossible state. This is the conclusion of accepting a four-dimensional/atemporal existence, as suggested by relativity. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.