Just post your theories down below, and I’ll get back to you ASAP
They had to. Nothing is highly unstable, so becoming something is just what it does.
One argument is that the energy from gravity and matter cancel each other out, and our universe is a zero energy state.
So it could arise from nothing.
Where does consciousness come from? The evolution of the brain. I don’t know when consciousness started, but integrated information theory could be why. Consciousness could be a side effect of complex physical systems.
I’m not sure if I’m understanding your logic. The law of conservation of energy is that it cannot be created or destroyed. And matter is nothing more than super condensed energy.
You would need to have a universe in order to have gravity.
Nothing(ness) is homogenous and isotropic. That is a peak state that is inherently unstable. By the laws of physics, as we know them, nothing would have a natural tendency to go off its peak state.
What is your position?
For example, to you have a hypothesis as to how, within the realm of known physics, the universe and, later, life and consciousness came about? Or do you think the universe, life, and consciousness were created by Intelligent Design?
I’m not even going to feign an attempt at explaining the universe but conciousness is pretty easy to explain from there. As pointed out by Wesley Clark.
Of course, one problem with the question is assuming the universe sprang from nothing.
Take hologram theory for instance , this basically presumes that the universe exists because of our perception of it. A particle here may actually be the same particle in numerous locations we just percieve it’s different. Thus the universe itself is a construct. We’re really just looking at something from a perspective that makes it impossible to explain what it even is, let alone where it came from.
Then why did you ask how the universe was created out of nothing? I don’t think I can rule out the possibility that the universe has always been around, never getting created and never getting destroyed — because I just now got told about stuff that “cannot be created or destroyed”, and so I just now shrugged and said “uh, okay.”
A legitimate view. We look at things, living and otherwise, and see that they tend to come into existence, abide for a while, usually experiencing some degree of metamorphosis, then eventually cease to exist in any recognizable form. The universe, in which all things we know of exist, is also a thing. Right? Is the universe a thing?
As far as I know, yes, one could characterize it as “a thing”. I’ve maybe even referred to it as “a thing” before; I don’t recall doing so, but that seems possible.
It’s time to retire this question as the OP phrases it. The latest scientific understanding is that nothingness is impossible. Quantum uncertainty means that every cubic inch of space is a constant froth of virtual particles which on rare occasion can become “real.” That makes for a base of virtual energy that can produce matter without violating any conservation laws.
Gotcha questions don’t work until you have a sufficiently firm understanding of the subject not to be embarrassed by instant demolition of your false beliefs.
But it is the sine qua non of things. Like the metathing.
I know, and our universe could be in a zero energy state, which means it requires no external energy to come into existence.
God created heaven and earth
So what’s in between atoms then if there is no such thing as nothing?
That’s not nothing, since we can measure the distance between atoms. If we can give it a scalar or vector quantity it is something, not nothing.
If this is a debate, it would be nice if you stated what you believe.
You sure do have a way with words.
Yeah, well, I used to listen to A Way with Words on NPR every Sunday. Or maybe it was PRI. Also, Take My Word for It has been quite good.