Something From Nothing - Atheist Experience #638

[SageAndOnions]

What is a wet dream? A dream, something without any physical properties whatsoever, producing a physical thing (sperm), which is capable of creating life. So, life itself can be made with simply a thought...giggles aside, this is proof of how a simple thought can produce physical life, a human life at that

[SephieRothe]

virtual particles appear in pairs of a particle and its antiparticle, and borrow from the energy present to create its mass, thus making no net change in energy. This is not limited to any one particle antiparticle pair. Under normal circumstances these particle pairs instantly annihilate each other, the process creating energy so again the energy is conserved.

[WolfEyesatNight]

Something From Nothing - what is thought?

[boywhoy88]

Think about it. How did particles and nothing create the universe, the planets, animals seeds and man? Think about it for a second. Someone or something had to create everything. Think about.

[emailpobox666]

@boywhoy88 "Someone or something had to create everything."Why ? why the need of a creator? No God required just give the human race a few hundred years to dispel the remains of the superstitions of religion

[boywhoy88]

@emailpobox666 Well. Jesus Christ is still waiting. He will give remission of sins and a new mind. He is waiting.

[emailpobox666]

@boywhoy88 That's OK I really don't need any more fictional characters in my life.. I manage to read a book or two a week most fiction and science fiction

[boywhoy88]

@emailpobox666 have a nice day

[kram83au]

@boywhoy88 im with you, it was a LEPRACAUN that created the universe. nobody has disproved this yet to me,so until then, i will keep believing this.good day laddie

[drche420]

To all the prejudiced Christians: If you believe your god created the universe, then what raw materials did "he" use to do so? Or are you claiming something came from nothing?

[emailpobox666]

@drche420 You forgot to mention that time itself didn't exist prior to the universe's existence. So go took nothing and in no time took the nothing and created the universe. LOL

[THEEVANTHETOON]

0:39

Virtual particles come from a quantum vacuum, which still require space-time to function. Furthermore, as Matt pointed out, we don't know enough about these particles to say they come from nothing; in fact, the belief that they do is only one of about a dozen different interpretations of the mathematics. Saying that science has found the cause of the universe is jumping the gun, assuming this gun ever fires.

[MadMAn12gauge]

and even if there is a god? So what i say!! i am no coward and will stand tall in w/e gods judgement is....perhaps even spit in its face! if it doesnt agree with how i lived my life....i dont bend over for anyone, and i am honest and fair...could care less when im dead that would be another matter and nobodies buisiness at that point...just like the billions of dead people that are forgotten...stand tall..that is how you become a god and it is a virtue of true character, anyone else is unworthy

[MadMAn12gauge]

for such people i say...lets send them to their god....good riddence, i would call a theists death a burden lifted from world society....even if it is a family member, their death makes the world brighter, not spewing their religious sedition onto others

[MadMAn12gauge]

religious people are the most dishonest people in the world....hence why they are religious....Speak the truth and live that way and there is nothing to fear....however religious cowards make everyones lives difficult....and i HATE ALL that dont follow the path of truth, and are to afraid to face the music of their own actions....cowards deserve their fate....i couldnt immagine a god that wants kneelers...what a boring afterlife

[MadMAn12gauge]

in other words theists are insane and give a shit about evidence or if anything is true or not....and cannot be trusted...Anyone that is willing to set aside their intelligence for one thing is most likely able to damn another person to death...

i say anyone thats religious deserves to be put through the inquisition....it is only fair since they did it allready....its our turn to show them the way of realism...and to respect evidence....or die...i stand by that

[MadMAn12gauge]

"man is accused of murder"

Thiest response : fucking hang him!

Athiest response: lets prove he is guilty first, if he is innocent let him go

Thiest counter : burn that fucking atheist for being an idealist

Me : What the fuck?!?!?

[GrendelNin]

Quantum Mechanics has shown that there really isn’t anything as ‘nothing’ or ‘empty space’. At the quantum level, the void seemingly of empty space is acctually a seething ocean of particles jumping into and out of existence constantly.

“If you think you understand Quantum Mechanics, you don’t understand Quantum Machines”. ~Richard Feynman.

[brindow1]

One of the strongest arguments of the theist has always been "something cannot come from nothing". This argument has now been invalidated and holds no water whatsoever..science has NOW provided total evidence that whichever section of space you examine, matter pops into existence-from non-existence ! Ithen pops back into non-existence, then back into existence. With a little stretch of the imagination one must ask ! could the origins of the universe have popped into existence from nothing.

[brindow1]

Something from nothing ! Of course we can't understand it, but we know now that whichever bit of space you go into there is matter popping up into existence and then disappearing, then existing again, etc.etc. I believe when we better understand "non existence" and "existence" we will be well on the way to understanding how and why we are here. But it is now a DEFINITIVE fact that existence comes from nothing. Where would we be without science?

[sliceman0]

Define/Describe Nothing?

[breaneainn]

What's north of the north pole? DUMBASS QUESTION with no answer.

What happened before the beginning? DUMBASS QUESTION with no answer.

How blue is red? DUMBASS QUESTION with no answer.

..plain old catagorical errors as simple paradox. junk-arguments.

[Parture]

The evidence we have of trillions and trillions of cause and effects in nature, and no hard evidence something coming from nothing, is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. So according to your infinite regress theory you would have happened already having had an eternity to do so. Thus, nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of space-time being uncreated.

[BeatleEDs]

:38 This is such bullshit. And it is dishonest to use this in this argument. Anyone who knows anything about physics understands that there is no such thing as nothing. I could go into detail but you lightweights would not understand.

[HolyCity2012]

@BeatleEDs You are so smart and everyone else is so stupid.

[BeatleEDs]

@HolyCity2012 - So what is nothing than?

[LocustFurii]

Isn't it a fallacy to think that god needs to be proved? From every teaching I've ever studied, God is considered non-quantifiable because it stems beyond the space/time continuum. You either get inspiration from the idea that there's a god or you don't. Simple. Perhaps debating this concept is also counter-productive because there is a god gene. The person who discovered the gay gene seems to think so. And why not be honest, everyone is atheist to some degree, this is anti-theism.

[1984LizardKing]

@LocustFurii no,you have fantastic claims,prove it.you cant get away with just saying"god is outside space and time so we dont need to prove anything" yes you do. who cares about anti theism anyway,how can christians moan about anti theism when atheists are the least trusted group and least liked group?

if god is outside space and time what s he doing communicating with people in the desert? and why does he have human attributes? jealousy etc etc

[LocustFurii]

@1984LizardKing You're dragging up a post from how long ago? I don't believe in the personification of a god or god(s) so I don't even know wtf you're talking about. Just let it be.

[TheNubian100]

I came from my parents and not nothing else point period Im god sorry theist

[Blackmark52]

I don't think the virtual particle referenced is evidence of something from nothing. What are elementary particles? Perhaps at that level, matter and energy are synonymous, with particles merely being intense concentrations of energy at a particular point. Whether particles are observed could then dependent upon a phase or fluctuation in energy. Nothing need literally pop in and out of existence.

[TheGodlessGuitarist]

@Blackmark52

" don't think the virtual particle referenced is evidence of something from nothing"

Quite correct. Watch the video "a universe from nothing"

when there is 'nothing' you have a perfect vacuum, which is actually an enormous store of potential energy. Quantum instability guarantees that there are fluctuations. Virtual particles (there is nothing 'virtual' about them in the commonly understood sense) are created out of quantumn events borrowing from that energy store.

[4TruthMatters]

This lady appeals to some distraction about a speculative particle that has no basis in anything, nor proves anything, while Matthew talks around his hat to avoid the rational impossibility of Nothingness producing something.

Matthew protests that Theists keep arguing this although it's "simply not true", but in reality, he has no answer to the irrationality of his belief that this finite Universe requires an Infinite source.

[TheGodlessGuitarist]

@4TruthMatters

"he has no answer to the irrationality of his belief that this finite Universe requires an Infinite source. "

OK, justify your claim that it needs an 'infinite source' and define 'infinite source'

[Icemario87]

I would believe in God if a chimpanzee suddenly turned into a human.

[powerslave118]

@Icemario87

Haha that is great!

[kappapi560]

@Icemario87 I still wouldn't. You couldn't prove that god did it, just that it happened. "God did it" still isn't a good enough explanation even if god did it. How did god do it? What or who is god? The god explanation opens new doors and leads to more doubt of god's abilities and right to demand respect of any kind.

[Icemario87]

@kappapi560 All very true. I just meant to be cute :P

(Also in, admittedly vain, hope that one creationist realizes their main argument against evolution is a red herring)

[TADahar]

@Icemario87

Happens every Monday morning after a wild weekends.

[CambridgeHeights]

@Icemario87 Why? All that would show is that a chimp can suddenly turn into a human. Amazing, yes, but not evidence for a god.

[Icemario87]

@CambridgeHeights Of course, you're right. I just wanted to remind christians of how dumb they sound when they say "i don't believe in evolution because it's impossible for a chimp to give birth to a human."

[breaneainn]

@Icemario87 Charlton Heston has guns bro, careful what you say.

[gupsphoo]

@Icemario87 You're correct. Just imagine what theists would say if a chimp suddenly turns into a man. They would say it's a miracle from god.

That shows what hypocrites these anti-evolution theists really are.

[GDuff123]

@Icemario87 I'm sure science could pull it off.

[JoM80]

@Icemario87 No you wouldn't - you would come up with a reason to not believe. You would probably say something like the chimpanzee was already human...

[Redbeardian]

I wonder why creationists always say the 'something from nothing' line ..... Is that what pulpit conartists keep telling them? Perhaps it's because their own assertions involve something coming from nothing so they assume all origins ideas are similar, just different causes? Which would be similar to them thinking that information is valid based on the authority of whomever brings it forward, I suppose.

[xnorthcarolinax]

virtual particles come from something, the quantum vacuum, which is energy, not nothing. also id like to hear what this guy thinks about the first law of thermodynamics along with the fact that an eternal universe is impossible. these guys are good at demolishing tenth graders, but their arguments about creation are absurd, being that since we cant observe creation in a lab setting then we have no reason to believe it ever happened, and thats just absurd

[AleximusMaximus]

This was particularly excellent from Matt

[xnorthcarolinax]

@AleximusMaximus saying that since we cannot observe creation in a lab setting we cannot believe it happened is far from excellent, im sorry but there is no good atheistic rationalization as to why there is something rather than nothing. an eternal universe is impossible and energy and matter cannot be created and cannot create itself, so the universe must have had a cause outside of nature at some point in the finite past

[AleximusMaximus]

@xnorthcarolinax

"saying that since we cannot observe creation in a lab setting we cannot believe it happened"

Asinine. Nobody is says that. Don't be so petty and simplistic.

"im sorry but there is no good atheistic rationalization as to why there is something rather than nothing."

No. There's not a theistic one either. There isn't one because it's one of the 'big questions'.

"an eternal universe is impossible"

What a stupid thing to say, how could you possibly know something like that.

[Redbeardian]

@xnorthcarolinax How is an eternal universe impossible and a cause outside of nature possible? There is no debate as to the universe needing a 'cause', but it's an issue of witholding stating what the cause was until there is sufficient evidence to bridge the gap between guessing at random and coming to a fairly probable conclusion.

[xnorthcarolinax]

@Redbeardian im saying that there has to be a cause outside of nature because nature cannot cause nature, energy cannot create more energy, first law of thermodynamics. an eternal universe would mean that an actually infinite number of years have passed. and ACTUALLY infinite number of things cannot exists. infinity creates logical contradictions, like if you take away half, you still have infinity. also we would have never made it to this point

[village1diot]

@xnorthcarolinax "nature cannot cause nature" Therefore a "supernatural" being must have caused nature? Silly. Who said nature needed a cause? Oh, I guess, you did.

"The concept of infinity cannot be grasped by a finite mind." -unknown

[xnorthcarolinax]

@village1diot so you agree the issue comes down to whether or not the universe is infinite in the past? an actual infinite value of things cannot exist. if you have infinity of baseball cards and you gave half away youd have the same number, thats a logical contradiction, and those cannot exist. also we would have never made it to this point, so its not a matter of whether or not we can fully grasp the concept, its whether or not the concept is at all possible, and its not

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@village1diot

"Therefore a "supernatural" being must have caused nature?"

Not a being, necessarily, but a supernatural (outside of nature) source.

"Who said nature needed a cause?"

Science.

"unknown"

Actual infinities do not exist in the actual world.

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON "Who said nature needed a cause?"Science." incorrect. The universe cam into being  not from nothing but from a quantum field

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@village1diot

"Therefore a 'supernatural' being must have caused nature"

Yes. Supernatural just means something exists transcedent of nature. Unless you want to believe that nothing exists (I at least exist, "I think, therefore I am"), that the universe is eternal (it's been demonstrated many times that it is not), or that things can create themselves (which is logically impossible), than there is no reason to reject that a transcendent force brought the universe into existence.

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@village1diot

"Who said nature needed a cause?"

Science + reason + common sense.

"unknown"

It can't. Infinity is a logically contradictory idea, and is impossible to logically operate in finite space. Furthermore, as Cantor proved, there can be no highest number. This has been backed up by philosophical thinking many times over. Lastly, science supports a finite universe.

Again, proof that Atheists just thumbs-things-up without actually understanding.

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON Take a minute and devide it in halk. Then devide the 1/2 into 1/2 then divide the 1/4 into 1/8 . When does the process stop? If it can go on forever then there is an infinite

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@emailpobox666

This is related to Zeno's paradox, and the ironic thing is we read about this in history today. First off, Aristotle disguised things infinite in respect to divisibility and things infinite in extension. Second, Dr. Craig would likely point out that you will never actually finish dividing the number, so it is a potential infinite rather than an actual infinite. Third, this paradox can be resolved by understanding how space-time and mathematics actually work.

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON The act of dividing will never be complete but it doesn not mean that there is not an infinite amonut of divisions. there is debate wheter infinties exist the question has yet to be answered.Yet you state with aabsolute certainity that the infinite does not exist. So what is your responce to the other question om Believing a lie

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@emailpobox666

"The act of dividing will never be complete but it doesn not mean that there is not an infinite amonut of divisions"

Sure, but you must understand the difference between possible and actual infinities. Possible infinities are a series of finite numbers that could potentially continue forever, while never reaching infinity. Actual infinities occur when an infinite number of some object exists in a finite amount of time. The latter is scientifically and mathematically impossible

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON " you must understand the difference between possible and actual infinities." Ohh no back to the ontological argument. Seems to me it was OK for you when discussing your MGB

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@emailpobox666

Lastly, if you are to grant this, than you must reject that things such as motion are impossible, as an infinite number of points must be transversed in a finite amount of time.

A rather good article on the refutations of this paradox can be found on the wikipedia article titled "Zeno's Paradoxes".

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON "Third, this paradox can be resolved by understanding how space-time and mathematics actually work. " And science has solved this problem?

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@emailpobox666

The example of splitting a number forever is an example of a possible infinity. If one were to grant an infinite universe, they must grant actual infinities, which just aren't possible.

"the question has yet to be answered"

Among philosophers and astrophysicists, it has. Youtube and village Atheists being unwilling to accept their conclusions doesn't count as a debate.

"science has solved this problem?"

By having a more concrete idea of how space-time exists and operates.

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON " The latter is scientifically and mathematically impossible " So your telling all physicist agree with that statement? I have to ask my son his opinion on that ,he's a physicist

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON So what do you have to saty about the comments I posted on "Believing a Lie "

[emailpobox666]

@THEEVANTHETOON "By having a more concrete idea of how space-time exists and operates." You imply there is a consensus on these theories and there is not

[TheGodlessGuitarist]

@xnorthcarolinax

"there has to be a cause outside of nature"

why?

"because nature cannot cause nature"

says who?

"energy cannot create more energy"

true, but who says it did? who says there was ever zero energy?

[ChristianIce]

@TheGodlessGuitarist

Something that I recently heard regarding Hawking's last book is "universe is a ZERO sum energy" (dunno if it's from the book, didn't buy it yet)

From this point of view you can have in a vacuum of zero energy the emerging of matter and antimatter that will sum zero.

Is there somebody that already did read Hawking's new book?

I have to wait for its translation (and for my lazy ass to go there buying it :)

[xnorthcarolinax]

@TheGodlessGuitarist time cannot be infinite in the past, so there must have been a start to energy

[TheGodlessGuitarist]

@xnorthcarolinax

"time cannot be infinite in the past, so there must have been a start to energy"

I'll skip the fact that you clearly have an infantile understanding of time, causality and philosophy for now.

If you think the 'cosmological argument' for god is sound then you really are a lazy individual, just stopping when you think you have an argument that works for you and not bother trying to understand why it fails.

Yawn, soooo why do you think it has to have a begining?

[TheGodlessGuitarist]

@xnorthcarolinax

oh and could you answer the question; why do you think the existence of anything depends on time?

[norbarellis]

Check out Lawrence Krass, a Universe From Nothing, full vid on youtube

[norbarellis]

Please check out Lawrence Krauss, a Universe from Nothing, full vid available on youtube

[mojame100]

Typical of athiest. there always in rebellion

[adjusttint]

there is no cause, it all just is

[superduperjew]

education ftw!

[thisisallidobitch7]

i respect this caller a lot...very humble and intellectually honest, just happened to have been told a bit too much creationist B.S.

[CanadiaNecro1]

I wish I knew more about physics. I've never actually taken a physics class in my life. Something coming from nothing doesn't seem all that big a stretch to me. Why couldn't it happen? Maybe there never was "nothingness" and everything we experience is part of a "loop" or "cycle" or something? I don't know. It seems like if there was an easy answer to this it would be common knowlege by now.

[fallbread]

interesting ideas fasinating

[PinkProgram]

So they want to call vacuum fluctuation God now?

[SourcesAreEverything]

Something CAN come from nothing.

[Rössler, O. (1976). "An equation for continuous chaos".

Physics Letters A, Vol. 57, Iss. 5, pp. 397-398.]

[village1diot]

@SourcesAreEverything I just scanned that article(and I will admit it was a little over my head right now at midnight) and don't see how his equations get something from nothing. Besides, I think the caller is actually thinking along the lines of something physically manifesting magically out of nothing.

[SourcesAreEverything]

@village1diot The equations show that continuous streams of information will naturally form more complex streams. That being said, information can appear in nature where is once was not found, hence something from nothing.

I don't know much beyond some facts I learned from a BBC documentary about Chaos Maths, but this program shows that these equations originate from earlier mathematicians explaining things like how camouflage patterns might form or "manifest" where they once didn't exist.

[Feralus69]

@SourcesAreEverything

I think what villageidiot was saying is absolute nothing will not produce something, the something from nothing in nature isn't something from an absolute nothing but a something from a prior something (information).

[SourcesAreEverything]

@Feralus69

Matter is constantly coming in and out of existence, apparently FROM NOTHING. Particles have been observed to appear from out of nowhere or 'from nothing' in quantum physics, therefore the religious claim that "something can't come from nothing" is simply a nonfactual, uninformed falsehood.

[Maris, P. & Roberts, C.D. (2003). "Dyson-Schwinger equations: a tool for hadron physics". International Journal of Modern Physics, vol. E12, pp. 297-365.]

[Feralus69]

@SourcesAreEverything

I think you are falsely assuming i`m religious, i`m actually the very opposite. You are trying to argue with a non established side, I simply told you what I thought villageidiot meant and showed that your example was faulty when you were applying it to nature. I`m not qualified to comment indepth on quantum physics but from my understanding the study is something from seemingly nothing

[Pelonetillo]

cant. science deals in the observable. nothingness cannot be observed.

[SourcesAreEverything]

@Pelonetillo Don't physicists consider the fabric of space, ie. the vacuum, to be nothingness?

I do know that true absolute zero has never been reached and that the Planck length applies to time as well as space. Perhaps physical nothingness can not exist in our universe but I'd have to look it up.

[Pelonetillo]

what physicists regard something as is beside the point. science is confined to the observable, thats why we all like it so much. some practitioners, unfortunately, get a little carried away when articulating their observations.

[village1diot]

@Pelonetillo I know enough about astrophysics to make me sound stupid, but is not the 'vacuum of space' often referred to as nothing by scientists? I have heard this in lectures having to do with 'dark matter' where they are comparing space containing particles and empty space(vacuum) with 'nothing' in it.

[village1diot]

Which, in this case, would make 'nothing' observable, in the sense that here we have an area of space with nothing in it. This has been observed, therefore 'nothingness' is observable and subject to scientific inquiry.

[Pelonetillo]

what they would be observing in that case is that which is distinguished from nothing, and not the nothing itself. nothing is a relative term; if someone is claiming to have witnessed absolute nothingness, theyre sensationalizing, imo. something cant come from nothing, otherwise it would no longer be regarded as nothing. its like a mother n child -- before bearing a child she was not a mother, but we would not say the child was born without a mother; the facts dont change, just the language.

[darketernal3]

@village1diot actually "darkmatter" is a mathematical uncertainty that is extra mass that needs to be accounted for mathematically to keep the universe as it stands, it's currently not observable. And for all purposes it is just a mathematical filler much like Einstine's Cosomogical constant.

It's not astrophysics per se, more of quantum mechanics.

[AleximusMaximus]

@darketernal3

As someone on an astrophysics degree I feel I know enough to say that's not quite right. Dark matter can't be directly observed because it doesn't directly interact with light. However, much like black holes it can be shown to be present by its gravitational effects.

This dark matter does still bend light gravitationally, and you can observe this gravitational lensing. It's distribution has actually been mapped using this phenomenon. What you say is truer of dark energy.

[indignant99]

@village1diot  No, the "vacuum of space" is not equivalent to "nothing." Genuine "nothing" means... not even the space.

[SourcesAreEverything]

@Pelonetillo Nothingness is an aspect of THIS universe. Physicists refer to this as "empty space" or "space-time". "Nothingness" may not have existed outside of the bounds of the big bang singularity & inflation.

village1diot has correctly articulated this point in other comments.

NOTHING IS DOES EXIST. Most of our universe, even within atoms, is in fact is taken up by nothingness as oppose to actual matter. Nothingness is observable and even able to be re-shaped by gravity.

(see citation below)

[SourcesAreEverything]

@SourcesAreEverything [Kuhn, K. & Koupelis, T. (2004). "In Quest of the Universe". Jones and Bartlett Publishers: Sudbury, MA.]

[Pelonetillo]

nothing is non-existence though, for it to exist would be a contradiction.

[village1diot]

Nothing is greater than god.

I am greater than nothing.

therefore I am greater than god.(which, of coarse, is true, regardless of nothing) :-)

There are many philosophies on 'nothingness', and of coarse, they also disagree with each other.

I did find a good answer to the 'vacuum' question..."A region of space is called a vacuum if it does not contain any matter. However, it can contain physical fields."

Which confirms what indignant99 said, they are not the same.

[Pelonetillo]

id sooner worship you, thats for sure. ;)

[MrReasonFTW]

@village1diot I'm sorry in this comment you kept saying coarse when you should have said course

[village1diot]

@MrReasonFTW Yeah, I used to do that a lot. Of coarse, that was a while back, I don't do it anymore.

[MrReasonFTW]

@village1diot I apologise for my grammar nazism