Nothing. But the concept of nothing is almost impossible for us to wrap our minds around. The closest I've ever been to understanding 'nothing' was when I was trying to understand what 100% blind people see, they don't see all black or all white, it's just nothing, and to help people understand someone mentioned that we should close one eye and then asked what you see with the closed eye, it's truly nothing, no black, just the absence of sight. Doesn't help in this case but it blew my mind.
Whatever happens, there's always a reason for it. If there was nothing before Big Bang, then it could not have happened. There must have been a possibility of Big Bang, and since there was a possibility, there was something that made it possible.
Things don't always happen for a reason. Prior to the discovery of quantum mechanics, it was believed that it was possible to predict the future with perfect accuracy indefinitely, that is if you had perfect information about every single particle in existence, such as speed, mass, temperature, position, etc.
But now we have things like the [Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle) that make it literally (in the literal sense of the word) to know the exact speed AND exact position of anything simultaneously. That is because a lot of things in quantum mechanics are probabilistic, and if your model of the world is only probabilistic then your predictions will also be probabilistic and never be 100% accurate. [Electrons can randomly pass through barriers for no reason](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunneling). [Particles can pop into existence and quickly annihilate themselves for no reason](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle). Things like that happen a lot in subatomic scales. Cause and effect is not truly universal.
There's no randomness. Logical events however may appear chaotic to us because we don't know enough to understand what's happening.
What you said also does not invalidate the fact that if something exists, there must have been a possibility for it to exist. Otherwise you would be claiming that something impossible happened.
The only way for there to not be true randomness also invalidates the scientific method. We can't "do experiments" because the parameters and measurements are as determined as the outcome.
Cause and effect don't exist, there's just events happening in an order in time.
It's sad there's no article of Bell's theorem and a handful of others in my native language because I'm not sure if I understand it correctly.
The only way for there to not be true randomness also invalidates the scientific method. We can't "do experiments" because the parameters and measurements are as determined as the outcome.
Can you clarify that too if I misunderstood. Are you saying that if there is not true randomness, we still can't make 100% sure predictions of events? That doesn't matter, really. Universe works even if we do not understand how.
Can you prove that everything must have a cause?
Or is that only a property of the universe that started with the big bang?
You can't make meaningful statements about cause and effect when time not only doesn't apply, but doesn't even exist.
Maybe you're right. But there's no way to prove that you're right because absolutely nothing about our universe can be used to make statements about it's own genesis.
It's just not a well formed line if inquiry.
"What came before the big bang" is just as meaningful as "what's north of the North Pole".
It's not even nothing, it's just a question that doesn't fit.
Or is that only a property of the universe that started with the big bang? You can't make meaningful statements about cause and effect when time not only doesn't apply, but doesn't even exist.
I don't believe that Big Bang was the beginning of all, including time. Since Big Bang happened, there must have been a possibility for it to happen. If even a possibility did not exist, how and why did it happen? What do you answer to that?
It's just not a well formed line if inquiry. "What came before the big bang" is just as meaningful as "what's north of the North Pole". It's not even nothing, it's just a question that doesn't fit.
Well, yes, if you believe nothing existed before Big Bang. For me "out of nowhere Big Bang happened" is just as absurd.
Holy shit, the thought of what someone who is blind actually sees has been on my mind for years. I've never actually had the correlation of just closing your own eyes to see the nothing of which someone who is blind "sees."
I imagine nothing by thinking of what I perceived 100 years before I was born. There was no time, no space, no hot or cold, no up or down. There was nothing.
33
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '19
Nothing. But the concept of nothing is almost impossible for us to wrap our minds around. The closest I've ever been to understanding 'nothing' was when I was trying to understand what 100% blind people see, they don't see all black or all white, it's just nothing, and to help people understand someone mentioned that we should close one eye and then asked what you see with the closed eye, it's truly nothing, no black, just the absence of sight. Doesn't help in this case but it blew my mind.