jahn79* · 7 years ago
What if all we are is thought that exists on the surface of a multi dimensional black hole. Ha e you read about the quantum double slit experiment s?
0 reply

Raxin · 7 years ago
If we are just thoughts, that's fine. It's like I say to my friend who suggests we're in a dream, dreams and thoughts are still experience, and experience is real, so it makes no difference to me if my pain and pleasure are dreamed. I still feel them. I know about the double-slit experiments. The results don't surprise me. They just show that the metaphors we learn from our large-scale (human size and above) experience, such as "wave" and "particle", are not sufficient to describe what's going on at the small scale. We need better language.
0 reply

jahn79* · 8 years ago
Or perhaps something exists that was nit created Or perhaps, somebody created the creato. Or both !!!!
0 reply

Conscious* · 7 years ago
Or some being exists beyond our understanding of existence because this being doesn't rely on resources for survival like we do. So, this being decided to create other beings capable of thought and the reason we disbelieve in this higher being is because there's not a living thing that we are aware of that isn't reliant on some other substance (we generally don't believe in somethig that doesn't have any observable proof) and so this leaves answers on where the first molecules came about because surely something cannot come from nothing... ? o.0
0 reply

Raxin · 7 years ago
It must be possible for something to come from nothing. Otherwise, there would still be nothing. http://www.wittyprofiles.com/q/7059092

0 reply

Conscious* · 7 years ago
With that logic there still leaves a possibility of a God existing. Also, it doesn't have to mean that the creator was created. There was fault in the "Believer's" first statement because it can lead to conclusion of a paradox like the Challenger explained. A better statement would be "The creator is infinite and all else was created by it". So it's arguable that the Creator could have came from nothing because "...otherwise there would still be nothing". This isn't really my actual take on it but my explanation based on your terms.
0 reply

Raxin · 7 years ago
Exactly. You totally got it. I've heard people say the first statement. It's illogical, and I showed why. My other post about something from nothing doesn't say there's no god, but if there is, as you read between the lines, it would have to come from nothing. Also unwritten there, but hopefully what a reader might be lead to consider, is the next step, which is to realize that if a god can come from nothing, then it should be even easier for the universe, which is presumably less complex than a god would be, to have come from nothing, making a god unnecessary to produce the universe. If a god can come from nothing, certainly, a universe can. Other suggestions simply beg the question, such as, "Something made god." (Where did the thing that made god come from?) "God was always here." (How?) I can't accept "always here" for anything. It's unimaginable. I can imagine always nothing, but it's apparent always nothing isn't what happened.
0 reply