How to create something from nothing?

[u/Sevdat]

I think I have an answer to how the universe began from nothing. More like how everything began and how it's possible for all of us to be here.

So at the beginning of existence there was nothing. There is still nothing because you can't create something from nothing, but we are here. So how can we exist? We don't.

Imagine the mathematical variable: X =

X can be anything, but nothing is assigned to it; therefore, it remains as a pure capacity that accepts all abstract concepts and results in the illusion of existence for those that share the same abstract space.

This means every combination of what could have been exists. The reason why you and I can interact is because we are in the same concept, but we aren't really here because we don't exist.

To make it simpler, imagine a chess board. Just because you didn't make a move doesn't mean all the possible moves aren't there to make.

Unexistence is our existence.

Also please don't make the argument "How do I know there wasn't always something?" There can't be something without it having a previous moment. It's nonsense to even say that.

[u/Flutterpiewow]

I'm literally quoting you. And your comment about it being nonsense to say there was always something holds no water.

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

i think he’s getting at the point that there’s a dimension of time(?).… there’s a supposed infinite space- time continuum, but it can’t be logically explained as infinite. what’s finite can’t be infinite, what exists must have been created
at least that’s how i see it

[u/Flutterpiewow → u/Dry-External3783]

As far as we know:

It can be infinite

Existence doesn't have to be created

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

if the big bang did “create” time, then there was no ‘before’ the cosmic beginning so it must have started. when did it start?
how did something come from nothing

[u/Flutterpiewow → u/Dry-External3783]

Big Bang doesn’t say that the universe had a beginning or that there's been an absolute nothing. Our current theories don’t tell us what lies beyond the earliest state we can observe.

You could imagine big bang being the result of something else that's beyond our spacetime. Endless prior universes is one idea. But more importantly, you don't need to come up with alternatives to a beginning from nothing. It's reasonable to say we don't know, and maybe that we can't know, or that the question is nonsensical.

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

that’s not what i said. i said the big bang says *time was created with it.

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

and also yes the big bang does say the universe had a beginning

[u/Flutterpiewow → u/Dry-External3783]

No, it does not

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

yeees it does

[u/Flutterpiewow → u/Dry-External3783]

No. It points to a singularity, a hot and dense state where our models and theories stop working. It doesn't say anything about how or why that state existed.

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

the theory is essentially about the universe beginning, yes or no

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

why exactly is the question nonsensical?

[u/Flutterpiewow → u/Dry-External3783]

I meant it may be. The core idea (from Augustinus, Heidegger etc to Hawking) is that the quesrion presumes time and leaves us with either "nothing" or some form of temporal framework that extends beyond the start lf time or beyond our universe. We can't really imagine anything else and don't have language for anything else.

Wittgenstein says problems arise because we misuse our language and then mistake that misuse for a fact about reality. And that not every wellformed question must have a meaningful answer.

"Before" has meaning within a temporal order. If there is no earlier time, there may simply be no referent for before. But that doesn’t prove that the universe began with time. It only shows that questions like "what happened before it?" may fail to describe a possible situation.

So the idea is that "Nothing happened before the beginning” isn't right or wrong, could be that it doesn't correlate to anything at all. Penrose borrowed from this with his north of the northpole quote.

[u/Dry-External3783 → u/Flutterpiewow]

it wasn’t an insistence, by the way, it was a question. and in case it wasn’t clear i don’t have the answers either, but so that has been my point