As an atheist, this has been the seemingly biggest problem I've personally had with myself: the idea that something can come from nothing. It makes no sense at all. It goes against one of the basic laws of the universe. Things don't just pop up out of nowhere. But I recently watched a video (I can't find it now) that has convinced me that it's at least plausible for something to come from nothing, and I thought I would share it with you all. It would be interesting to hear the opinions of fellow VGCharters.

Okay, why can't he universe come from nothing? Most would say because of the fact that "something cannot come from nothing". This is one of the core laws about our universe. Now imagine nothingness; there are no objects, no people, planets, air, dust, etc. While that is true, there also aren't any abstract things. Laws, limits, rules, etc. do not exist in nothingness. If no laws exist in nothingness, then the law that "something cannot come from nothing" also doesn't exist. There are no laws governing nothingness that claim "something cannot come from nothing." Because no such laws exist, then something can come from nothing, in theory at least.

Now, I'm not using this as absolute proof that our universe did come from nothing. But I think this at least makes it plausible, which is more than what I and many others may have believed. I just thought this was interesting and was wondering what many of you guys think about it. With no laws to say otherwise, is plausible for something to come from nothing? I'm not asking you to accept this as true or to lose faith in a creator or anything. I just want to know if you think this is plausible, at least.

Also, is it theoretically possible for there to be nothing? Think about it; if there is nothing, then there are still facts - the fact that there is nothing; otherwise, something would exist. It's impossible for facts not to exist.. But a fact is something. So, if facts always exist as something, then is it possible for nothing to exist? But then again, a fact that "nothing exists' seems paradoxical, doesn't it? Whatever you believe in - God, the universe coming from nothing, multiverse, etc- I think its safe to say no theory seems to make 'sense', no matter which you believe. At least not to me.

What do you think about this?

Ding dong.

Correct. The laws of the universe only come into place when you have particles that interact with each other. They are not infinite. They depend on each particle and the effect that particle has in the others. Be it an atom or dark matter.

Something coming from nothing is hard to believe cause we think orderly, but in fact the universe is a place of chaos. The interaction between the particles is what makes it look orderly, in a certain way.

It's a pointless OP.

Unless someone has put together an experiment where something comes forth out of nothing, it's just a bunch of words.

Stefan.De.Machtige said: It's a pointless OP. Unless someone has put together an experiment where something come forth out of nothing, it's just a bunch of words.

Something else comes to mind that is nothing more than a bunch of words and many people take it for granted. Difference is, the OP has a logic point.

 

Besides, it sounds like a crazy experiment. You'd basically be replicating the big bang.

Well, if we are talking about theoretical possibilities beyond current laws of physics, then the possibilities literally are endless. For that reason I do find it incredible that some people think they know the answer to what created these laws (well, and everything else in this world) in the first place. I mean, what are the odds of being correct when the number of options are infinite?


Yeah... I'll just settle with not knowing or claiming to know the answer. That way I know I won't choose the wrong answer and make false conclusions.

Stefan.De.Machtige said: It's a pointless OP. Unless someone has put together an experiment where something comes forth out of nothing, it's just a bunch of words.

It's not pointless I thought it was a good read at the very least and at least provokes thought on the subject. 

Stefan.De.Machtige said: It's a pointless OP. Unless someone has put together an experiment where something come forth out of nothing, it's just a bunch of words.

Pointless? Perhaps.

As for your experiment, that would be impossible to create. In order for there to be an experiment, there must also be a universe consisting of laws. The fact that these laws exists makes it impossible for a scientist to create an artificial nothingness.

Just a bunch of words? Correct, but you could have inferred that much just by reading the title. After realizing how pointless the OP was, why devote energy into reading it and later responding to it?

This might actually be a good read for you guys:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110727161135.htm

If anti-matter exists and negates matter. What happens when theres equal ammounts of both? The real question is what made the balance tip over to the matter side... maybe it didnt and we have an anti-universe paralel to ours.

I favour the idea that 'nothing' is a sea of random spontaneous energy. Sometimes, given enough time, a universe forms. Sometimes a universe is destroyed. This is the simplest and most natural extension of what we already know about vacuum. The universe's laws and so on are actually unique to it and a property of its formation rather than universal truth.

The conception of 'nothing' as truly empty and uneventful is a human thing and at odds with quantum mechanics.

Nem said: Stefan.De.Machtige said: It's a pointless OP. Unless someone has put together an experiment where something come forth out of nothing, it's just a bunch of words. Something else comes to mind that is nothing more than a bunch of words and many people take it for granted. Difference is, the OP has a logic point. Besides, it sounds like a crazy experiment. You'd basically be replicating the big bang.

Off-course, it's the only way to prove it happened.

I don't see the logic in the OP. It applies to either faith or filosofie. Neither are science, nor fact. And those two are needed to present an atheist point of view.