On 2/1/2012 10:57 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:47 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
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.
Or to paraphrase Quine: What is there? Everything. So what isn't
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
Hi Jason and Brent,
I hope that you both realize that the "four dimensional structure"
does not take QM into account as SR assumes that observables all commute
and there is no Plank's constant. Why this is not more widely understood
is mysterious to me! It is as if a simple error keeps being repeated
over and over and no one has the temerity to point it out and offer a
correction. Maybe people want the idea to be true so they ignore the
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at