Why The Indefensibility of Ex Nihilo Nihil Goes Wrong for Theists is a post by Richard Carrier (for twitter people) where he argues that Krauss misses the point and that theists have no leg to stand on.
An Inclusive Site Dedicated to Life-Long Learning
Any thoughts worth writing about
On the lookout for more joy
Observations and reflectionsf
You - philosophical, thoughtful, witty. Me - still thinks fart jokes are funny. We should DEFINITELY get together!
Questioning the conventional wisdom
Everything random... At 3am 😊
These are unedited versions of my thoughts straight from the mind, a relieve from the ‘pressure cooker’, snippets and flotsam of a mundane existence, collected over time, at the early morning hours at sunrise. I have no intensions to start a self-help group or a forum for complains!
Blossoming: A Story of Beauty, Pain, Struggle & Growth
The African Environmental Blog site
The world inside my head is beautiful 🌷🌷
Videos of feral cats on the streets, and my own four feral felines at home, feline humor, advice, and gifts for your cat.
My journey to finding love through the sea Fuckboys
A blog by the Global Governance Centre, Graduate Institute, Geneva
Nicole
Cogito Ergo Sum
Sustainable Living & Wildlife Conservation
Where The Eagles Fly . . . . Art Science Poetry Music & Ideas
One minute info blogs escaping the faith trap
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t…
Mark and Abbie Jury
Life is intuition woven on fickleness.
Life is a journey. Let us meet at the intersection and share a story.
Random musings about everything.
With(out) Predicates
I call architecture frozen music. – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Random thoughts 
Carrier’s broadening his work, huh.
It really only requires four words: There was never nothing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah,
there was always something in short?
LikeLike
You can’t have ‘nothing’ because ‘nothing’ is unstable. It’s an impossible state.
LikeLike
JZ, I know you’ve talked about this on you-lknow-who’s site, but never really understood it … and didn’t want to get into the middle of the (contentious) “discussion.” So, if Mak would allow … what do you mean by “nothing is unstable.” And where does this thought/conclusion originate?
LikeLiked by 1 person
” … what do you mean by “nothing is unstable.” I can answer this. Since there’s nothing in Trump’s head, he’s a very unstable person. See?
LikeLiked by 2 people
i agree with this
LikeLiked by 2 people
From what I understand, it’s to do with the Zero-energy universe. A gravitational field has negative energy. Matter has positive energy. Calculations reveal that the sum total of both is zero. Zero *is* something, and that something has always been in motion, which is what Krauss means when he talks about quantum fluctuations. In this sense, you simply can’t have “nothing.” It’s an imaginary state.
LikeLiked by 2 people
So essentially, it’s a hypothesis … that came about through a lot of heavy thinking by a lot of really smart scientific minds. However, as with other really deep stuff … a bit of research seems to indicate not everyone agrees.
As someone said: “One of my personally (sic) annoyances is when people don’t make a clear distinction between “stuff that everyone agrees on” and “stuff that we are just guessing. The big bang is something that “stuff everyone agrees on.” Anything saying that the BB started from a zero energy fluctuation is “stuff that we are guessing about.”
Personally, from a VERY layman POV, I don’t think anyone really knows enough to make absolute statements. And I’m particularly pointing the finger at Christians and others that believe in supernatural beings!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The math works, we are in a zero-energy universe, but yes, no one knows. The BB is just a hypothesis. We actually know nothing about what was happening before inflation, and probably will never know as all information is erased.
LikeLike
Well, before inflation, things weren’t so god damned expensive!
LikeLiked by 2 people
hahahah Nan, you have won me over with this comment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Carrier argues that this point by Krauss misses the point. When the theologians talk about nothing, they mean actually nothing, no energy fields, no energy. So it is this that he addresses in his argument.
LikeLike
Yeah, I saw that bit in the article, but I think Carrier actually has it wrong. Or hasn’t presented it correctly. There is no “nothing” in the cosmologist’s mind. In the math. Krauss isn’t missing what the theologian is saying, rather pointing out that it’s nonsensical in the first instance because ‘nothing’ (for a wave) is a superposition of everything.
LikeLike
Just found this thread on Quora, it explains it better than I ever could.
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-universe-exist-Why-is-there-something-rather-than-nothing
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent article…over my head, but nonetheless..
I have always felt that the state of absolute nothingness cannot exist…that there has always been something…not particles, but something we don’t yet understand.
To me, the notion of something coming from nothing is a moot point, as there is no such thing as nothing…
Just a feeling. I have no scientific background, although I find it all immensely fascinating.
LikeLiked by 1 person
the question Carrier is asking is whether such a state involves a contradiction? If it doesn’t, then it can logically exist
LikeLike
Exactly, “nothing” is an imaginary state. It can’t exist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I found this article and it’s way over my head, but…😜
It seems to take the universe as far back as possible, but to me there is still something and true absolute nothingness is an impossible state, but what do I know…
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/08/16/the-physics-of-nothing-the-phi/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great article!
LikeLike
Not that it addresses John’s points here, but if you are interested in a short and interesting read, I recommend “Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea” by Charles Seife. It’s interesting how the concept of nothingness was rejected by mathematicians particularly in Europe where mathematics was heavily influenced by the Greeks.
In addition to what John said, I think it would also be fair that pure nothingness also doesn’t really make a lot of sense. I mean what could possibly be outside the confines of this universe. If it is truly nothingness it can neither be explored or measured. Because if it could then it would be something. There is no place in which there is nothing, because if it’s a place it’s something. 🙂
For me the why is there is something rather than nothing question builds a false dichotomy between two choices. It’s interesting to me the relationship mathematically between infinity and zero…both are useful in mathematics but in an absolute sense I think it’s true that both are not actually possible to reach in reality.
LikeLike
One can always say why is there something other than nothing? it just is
LikeLike
Oh, I get it! The Russia probe into Trump is a “nothing-burger” even though there’s really something there! Awesome!
LikeLiked by 2 people
And that, kiddies, is how this universe came into being.
LikeLiked by 1 person
HURRAY!!!! See, I’m like a smart person and a stable genius! HURRAY!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve nothing to say on the topic as there’s always something going on somewhere and/or some-when.
LikeLike
The propositions lean too much on the 1st one, which is already weak on it’s own.
Proposition 10 assumes a certain number (random number) of possibilities exist while the main argument tries to demonstrate that it’s infinite.
The main point holds solid, but I feel the props are not as solid. There’s lots of legs and leg room for those still looking for the truth; both theists and atheists
LikeLike
how is the first proposition weak?
Can a square circle exist?
Proposition doesn’t make that assumption. He is only giving examples.
LikeLike
That one does, it assumes logic is the one and only path knowledge. Logic is mostly strong in hindsight, not always strong in breaking new frontiers. A square is a cornered circle, and a circle a cornerless square, extremes of each other.
LikeLike
A circle being a corner less square does not make a square circle. By definition a circle cannot be a square.
Logic as a tool is useful in navigating contradictions.
LikeLike
Yes, but from one comes the other. Logic is useful though not a magic bullet for all times.
LikeLike
Pure absolute nothingness is Donald Trump’s brain
LikeLiked by 2 people
Donald is stable genius
LikeLike
Mary, IMO, you get the prize for the most erudite comment of the day!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting discussion. Since Donald Duck loves Twitter, I have discontinued my use of that service. Nothing clearly begets nothing. Naked hugs!
LikeLike
[…] the interesting discussion on the problem with nothing and why creation ex nihilo is impossible, Ethan tells us the BB is the only game in […]
LikeLike