A Universe from Nothing?

[Ben Dhyan]

Only one word is missing.
"else"
Can you add it ?
~
'mud

Mud...I do enjoy your poetic cryptic perspective on things.....but you often lose me... In this case I can only imagine the last line meant that given the aforesaid regarding singularities and all being true...eternity is not needed to explain things?

 

[`mud]

hey Ben,
"My own position is that the universe is eternal and nothing can come from nothing...."
maybe:
"My own position is that the universe is eternal and nothing "else" can come from nothing...."
~
Just a silly thought....I have a lot of them !
~
'mud

 

[Ben Dhyan]

hey Ben,
"My own position is that the universe is eternal and nothing can come from nothing...."
maybe:
"My own position is that the universe is eternal and nothing "else" can come from nothing...."
~
Just a silly thought....I have a lot of them !
~
'mud

Ok mud....I think I get it.....but it still appears to me to be able to be read as though only the eternal universe came from nothing?

Nothing has never been in all eternity....the concept can only refer to a relative absence of some thing.. It follows then logically that the eternal universe could never have come from nothing...

I understand that most people find their mind can not conceive of there being no beginning to existence....which I suppose is why the absurdity of a universe from nothing or a God creation from nothing seems to them less absurd than a birthless universe.... they can at least imagine a creation act to start time....but they can't imagine time that had no beginning... The reasons for this in itself would be an interesting topic to discuss...

Anyone?

 

[`mud]

Where does this 'beginning' start, where is the 'else' ?
I agree with you wholeheartedly, therein the question.
But.....where does our 'eternity' start ?
That's where I seem to find circularity, per the 'inflation'.
Does what goes around come around ?
That's why I get confused.....
At 77, there's never enough 'time'.
~
'mud

 

[allfoak]

All is Mind.
Everything exists within the Mind of God.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Where does this 'beginning' start, where is the 'else' ?
I agree with you wholeheartedly, therein the question.
But.....where does our 'eternity' start ?
That's where I seem to find circularity, per the 'inflation'.
Does what goes around come around ?
That's why I get confused.....
At 77, there's never enough 'time'.
~
'mud

Mud...please note that when I use the word 'universal existence' I am not talking about transient physical forms...whether they be singularities...stars...humans...or germs......etc..........I am talking about the sum total of all that is....energy, matter, and whatever else the human senses can not detect...

Human minds operating in the dualisitic mode....ie.. observer and observed....knows itself as having a beginning and an ending...and all else our physical senses permit us to observe.....has a beginning and an ending... We naturally assume that there is nothing in existence that does not also have a beginning and an ending... This is in fact an error of projection....to project onto universal existence itself, the finite limitations of physical forms...whether those forms be bacteria, humans, stars, or galaxies or singualirites... We can show that human science can not create anything from nothing, nor can destroy anything to make it into nothing.....it can, just like nature can and does....create, preserve, and destroy material forms...recycling the same constituents...

Other than that...the underlying sum total of energy and matter. etc.. in existence now has forever been the same....what goes around comes around only applies to the forms....they change...eternally...but it is impossible for there to have been a beginning to this process...there is no start to eternity...and no finish...no else... That there is no start to eternity is a fact because logically, it could not be any other way.... If one ponders this deeply and persistently....the mind's intuitive faculty eventually is able to transcend the tendency to project the facts of finite reality onto infinite reality....and see clearly that there could never having been a start or an else...

 

[`mud]

hey Ben,
Well said....now go to your room !

~
'mud

 

[leibowde84]

I believe science is limited to that which exists materially.

Can you cite the scientific theory you referenced though? I've heard of hypotheses like abiogenesis and such, but I've not heard of a scientific theory that claims that the universe arose from nothing. The Big Bang Theory certainly doesn't claim such things.

 

[godnotgod]

The assumption is that The Universe is a material affair; a 'something'. But Quantum Mechanics now points to the fact that all of the mass of the atom is virtual mass, continually created via fluctuations in the Unified Field, sort of like the images on your computer screen are recreated many times a second, called 'refresh rate'. There is no such 'matter'. We are dealing with appearances, but those of a higher order. The Universe we envision as 'real' has hardness, solidity, texture, sound, etc. IOW, a universe accessible via perception. It is this Unified Field that is Pure Abstract Intelligence, out of which Everything comes; essentially Everything comes out of Nothing. This idea solves the problem of the origin of the original material out of which the Universe emerged, since there is no such material to be concerned about. The only true Reality is Pure Consciousness. The Big Bang was (and still is) an event in Consciousness. This also suggests that brains are created by Consciousness, and not the other way around. Consciousness is Pure Nothingness.

 

[Aiviu]

Consciousness is Pure Nothingness.

This consciousness merely maps us to create something into its nothingness? We "draw" this pure nothingness alive while we live in its consciousness.

 

[gnostic]

This consciousness merely maps us to create something into its nothingness? We "draw" this pure nothingness alive while we live in its consciousness.

Huh...

 

[jonathan180iq]

I'm not sure if I can post a poll on here but who here believes that the universe originated from nothing? As some of the major scientific theories from the 20th century claimed or was there an originator of some sort? Doesn't have to be God necessarily in your opinion. Who believes the universe has no beginning? I'm just curious as to what you guys believe with regard to this topic and what the basis of your belief would be?

I have absolutely no idea.

That's the most intellectually honest answer that anyone can give.

 

[Aiviu]

Huh...

Umm. no its ok. I am thinking out loud ... sry.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hey Aup, I'm gaining more and more respect for your posts !

You have been kind to me.

Does it mean that we can get younger or stay at the age we are?

Yeah, who would not like to be a little younger?

My own position is that the universe is eternal and nothing can come from nothing....

IMHO, that is a difficult position to defend. What did it arise from?

 

[godnotgod]

You have been kind to me. Yeah, who would not like to be a little younger? IMHO, that is a difficult position to defend. What did it arise from?

It is The Changeless; Brahman; The Absolute, which does not come and go, but only appears to do so. It is Unborn, Uncaused, Unconditioned, not in Time or Space, and so is Beginning-less. As it is a Source unto itself, it arises from nothing. There is no 'other'.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I have absolutely no idea.

That's the most intellectually honest answer that anyone can give.

Ego alert....because you are ignorant...you judge it to be the universal gold standard...

 

[godnotgod]

This consciousness merely maps us to create something into its nothingness? We "draw" this pure nothingness alive while we live in its consciousness.

When you are asleep, dreaming, consciousness creates an entire dream-world, with dream hunger, thirst, adventure, scenery, etc. During the dream, it is real. When you awaken, you realize the illusory nature of the dream. Same is true from this level to the next higher one, but the dream, the illusion, is of a much higher calibre.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Ego alert....because you are ignorant...you judge it to be the universal gold standard...

Possibly - but it's more intellectually honest than claiming absolute knowledge on a topic that is, essentially, unknowable.

Disagreeing with that is more egotistical, is it not?

Knowledge and belief are two very different things.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Possibly - but it's more intellectually honest than claiming absolute knowledge on a topic that is, essentially, unknowable.

Disagreeing with that is more egotistical, is it not?

Knowledge and belief are two very different things.

You are the one claiming that such a thing as absolute knowledge is required to see that nothing can not exist....it is really just simple logical understanding! There is no absolute nothing.....do you agree or disagree?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

IMHO, that is a difficult position to defend. What did it arise from?

From the fact that nothing can not exist!

1. I can prove to you that something does exist.....the essence of the matter/energy.that does exist does exist.....yes?

2. To claim or hypothesize this real essence to have not always existed, you must be able to tell me what existed when you imagine this real essence did not exist?

3. If you can not, then we are left with eternal existence as the only logical conclusion....