On 12 January 2015 at 17:23, 'Roger' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> Everyone, > > I'd like to propose that we get back to the subject of discussing our > ideas on how the universe works, why it's here, etc., and stop talking > about religion so much. It'd be nice if we could all also provide > constructive criticism if we disagree, instead of insults. If this turns > into a religion, hatred, insults type forum, for me at least, it will have > lost the value it had. > > To start, I'd like to propose the following: We all have different > views on the question "Why there is something rather than nothing?", if > that question even has value, how the universe works, etc. I think it's > safe to say that, unless you're an academic, our ideas are also routinely > ignored, criticized and made fun of by academics. The only way for > amateurs to ever get more traction is if we can take our ideas on the > universe, build them up, and make models and testable predictions. That's > pretty much the scientific method. Also, if we're discussing metaphysics, > metaphysics is the study of being and existence. Because the universe > "be"s and exists, and physics is the study of how the universe works, the > laws of physics and the universe should be derivable from the principles of > metaphysics. I think many of us are trying to work out the principles of > metaphysics that apply to how the universe works. I call this a > metaphysics-to-physics or philosophical engineering approach. I'd like to > challenge all of us to build models and make predictions based on our > ideas. That's what I'm trying to do in my own thinking. I've got a very > basic beginning model based on my thinking at my website at: > > > https://sites.google.com/site/ralphthewebsite/filecabinet/why-is-there-something-rather-than-nothing > > in the section called Use of the proposed solution to build a model of the > universe. I look forward to reading about others' models on this list in > the future. > > Anyways, even if no one is interested, I'd still vote to get away from > religion. Live and let live, let everyone have their say, and move on. > That's my two cents. Thanks. > > OK. I have many times dismissed the God hypothesis (on this forum) as having no explanatory value, as have others. But it keeps coming back. But anyway... I don't think there is necessarily something rather than nothing. There may only appear to be - the "something" of a material universe may be somehow derived from the "nothing" of all possible information, as suggested by Russell and others. I think any serious attempt to explain the S vs N (on this list, given what's already been said) should start from the basis that "nothing" has to mean nothing physical - no pre-quantum fields or whatever are good enough, they're still something. Otherwise you're just going from something to somethnig else, which is fine in itself but it shouldnt be advertised as something from nothing. My 2c -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
