Problems with Ex Nihilo Creation

[edthecynic]

As I understand it before the beginning there was absolutely nothing. Then something happened to that nothing that caused it to become something, and that something became everything. I prefer to think that reality is a creation of consciousness instead of the other way around. Mind had to come before reality..

That is what the bible claims. Science has proven that energy has always existed and will always exist, and energy is actually something and not nothing, as proven by the fact that energy can be measured.

 

[edthecynic]

"No thing" is not the same as 'nothing'.

Yes it is when talking about the cosmos.

 

[edthecynic]

'God' is no 'thing'. Even science says the universe is one, and not many 'things'.
No thing could easily have come from No Thing.

That violates the First Law of Thermodynamics.

How many times do I have to go through this with you?

I would guess as many times as it will take you to come up with a repeatable experiment that disproves the proven FLoT.

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

 

[ding]

'God' is no 'thing'. Even science says the universe is one, and not many 'things'.
No thing could easily have come from No Thing.

That violates the First Law of Thermodynamics.

How many times do I have to go through this with you?

I would guess as many times as it will take you to come up with a repeatable experiment that disproves the proven FLoT.

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

No. A better way to state it would actually to state what it actually says.

 

[ding]

As I understand it before the beginning there was absolutely nothing. Then something happened to that nothing that caused it to become something, and that something became everything. I prefer to think that reality is a creation of consciousness instead of the other way around. Mind had to come before reality..

That is what the bible claims. Science has proven that energy has always existed and will always exist, and energy is actually something and not nothing, as proven by the fact that energy can be measured.

Actually that isn't true. We've been through several times already.

Matter and energy did have a beginning.

Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

 

[ding]

'God' is no 'thing'. Even science says the universe is one, and not many 'things'.
No thing could easily have come from No Thing.

That violates the First Law of Thermodynamics.

How many times do I have to go through this with you?

I would guess as many times as it will take you to come up with a repeatable experiment that disproves the proven FLoT.

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

 

[edthecynic]

As I understand it before the beginning there was absolutely nothing. Then something happened to that nothing that caused it to become something, and that something became everything. I prefer to think that reality is a creation of consciousness instead of the other way around. Mind had to come before reality..

That is what the bible claims. Science has proven that energy has always existed and will always exist, and energy is actually something and not nothing, as proven by the fact that energy can be measured.

Actually that isn't true. We've been through several times already.

Matter and energy did have a beginning.

Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

Energy has no beginning and no end, what part of "can neither be created nor destroyed" don't you understand? Your video said nothing about energy having a beginning.

 

[edthecynic]

That violates the First Law of Thermodynamics.

How many times do I have to go through this with you?

I would guess as many times as it will take you to come up with a repeatable experiment that disproves the proven FLoT.

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

Again it is the same thing, nowhere in that video does he argue that ENERGY has a beginning. YOU are basically arguing that if the universe had a beginning then energy had a beginning, an argument none of your videos makes.
Again, the FLoT states that energy can neither be created (has no beginning) nor destroyed (has no end).

 

[Picaro]

There is a video series on youtube regarding the problems with ex nihilo creation (ceation out of nothing). Here is a link to that video series:

Problems with Ex Nihilo Video Series - YouTube

Your Philosophy teacher hasn't read the OT if he says that's what the OT says about 'Creation'. He needs to read Job and a few other choice chapters of a couple other books. 'God' is an extremely busy entity, which is why your personal narcissistic whining isn't his first priority.

Some of course will have major problems trying to resolve some of Genesis with Job, but that's only because they don't understand much themselves and think the bible is just another 'pick it up and read' book that requires no special teaching to read and understand.

 

[ding]

As I understand it before the beginning there was absolutely nothing. Then something happened to that nothing that caused it to become something, and that something became everything. I prefer to think that reality is a creation of consciousness instead of the other way around. Mind had to come before reality..

That is what the bible claims. Science has proven that energy has always existed and will always exist, and energy is actually something and not nothing, as proven by the fact that energy can be measured.

Actually that isn't true. We've been through several times already.

Matter and energy did have a beginning.

Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

Energy has no beginning and no end, what part of "can neither be created nor destroyed" don't you understand? Your video said nothing about energy having a beginning.

Actually it did.

But if you want to hear it more explicitly...

 

[Picaro]

What was 'created' was order out of 'chaos'. Chaos = Nothingness in many philosophical constructs. It doesn't mean there is literally 'nothing' there.

 

[ding]

How many times do I have to go through this with you?

I would guess as many times as it will take you to come up with a repeatable experiment that disproves the proven FLoT.

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

Again it is the same thing, nowhere in that video does he argue that ENERGY has a beginning. YOU are basically arguing that if the universe had a beginning then energy had a beginning, an argument none of your videos makes.
Again, the FLoT states that energy can neither be created (has no beginning) nor destroyed (has no end).

Space and time is energy and matter.

 

[edthecynic]

As I understand it before the beginning there was absolutely nothing. Then something happened to that nothing that caused it to become something, and that something became everything. I prefer to think that reality is a creation of consciousness instead of the other way around. Mind had to come before reality..

That is what the bible claims. Science has proven that energy has always existed and will always exist, and energy is actually something and not nothing, as proven by the fact that energy can be measured.

Actually that isn't true. We've been through several times already.

Matter and energy did have a beginning.

Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

Energy has no beginning and no end, what part of "can neither be created nor destroyed" don't you understand? Your video said nothing about energy having a beginning.

Actually it did.

But if you want to hear it more explicitly...

Except positive energy is something, it can be measured, and negative energy is also something and can also be measured, neither is nothing. Your argument is two somethings in equal amounts and in balance are suddenly nothing.

 

[edthecynic]

I would guess as many times as it will take you to come up with a repeatable experiment that disproves the proven FLoT.

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

Again it is the same thing, nowhere in that video does he argue that ENERGY has a beginning. YOU are basically arguing that if the universe had a beginning then energy had a beginning, an argument none of your videos makes.
Again, the FLoT states that energy can neither be created (has no beginning) nor destroyed (has no end).

Space and time is energy and matter.

You left out two critical words, "IN MOTION."
As has been pointed out to you many times before, tine exists ONLY in terms of motion.

 

[there4eyeM]

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

Again it is the same thing, nowhere in that video does he argue that ENERGY has a beginning. YOU are basically arguing that if the universe had a beginning then energy had a beginning, an argument none of your videos makes.
Again, the FLoT states that energy can neither be created (has no beginning) nor destroyed (has no end).

Space and time is energy and matter.

You left out two critical words, "IN MOTION."
As has been pointed out to you many times before, tine exists ONLY in terms of motion.

So, existence needs time in order to occur? Then, 'before the big bang' may just have been the state before time. Yet, if there were no time, what "state" could "be"?

 

[edthecynic]

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

Again it is the same thing, nowhere in that video does he argue that ENERGY has a beginning. YOU are basically arguing that if the universe had a beginning then energy had a beginning, an argument none of your videos makes.
Again, the FLoT states that energy can neither be created (has no beginning) nor destroyed (has no end).

Space and time is energy and matter.

You left out two critical words, "IN MOTION."
As has been pointed out to you many times before, tine exists ONLY in terms of motion.

So, existence needs time in order to occur? Then, 'before the big bang' may just have been the state before time. Yet, if there were no time, what "state" could "be"?

The state of energy. Energy does not need time. Energy is.

 

[ding]

As I understand it before the beginning there was absolutely nothing. Then something happened to that nothing that caused it to become something, and that something became everything. I prefer to think that reality is a creation of consciousness instead of the other way around. Mind had to come before reality..

That is what the bible claims. Science has proven that energy has always existed and will always exist, and energy is actually something and not nothing, as proven by the fact that energy can be measured.

Actually that isn't true. We've been through several times already.

Matter and energy did have a beginning.

Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

Energy has no beginning and no end, what part of "can neither be created nor destroyed" don't you understand? Your video said nothing about energy having a beginning.

Actually it did.

But if you want to hear it more explicitly...

Except positive energy is something, it can be measured, and negative energy is also something and can also be measured, neither is nothing. Your argument is two somethings in equal amounts and in balance are suddenly nothing.

You mean the position of every leading cosmologist? Yes. That is what they believe. The net energy of a closed system is zero.

 

[ding]

But he said nothing can come from nothing. That is a true statement and does not violate the FLoT.

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

Again it is the same thing, nowhere in that video does he argue that ENERGY has a beginning. YOU are basically arguing that if the universe had a beginning then energy had a beginning, an argument none of your videos makes.
Again, the FLoT states that energy can neither be created (has no beginning) nor destroyed (has no end).

Space and time is energy and matter.

You left out two critical words, "IN MOTION."
As has been pointed out to you many times before, tine exists ONLY in terms of motion.

No, Ed. You don't know what you are talking about.

Time can be said to be the measure of the expansion of the universe.

When I say space and time it is meant to imply space time.

There was no time before the universe began because there was no space time.

Get with the program Ed.

 

[edthecynic]

That is what the bible claims. Science has proven that energy has always existed and will always exist, and energy is actually something and not nothing, as proven by the fact that energy can be measured.

Actually that isn't true. We've been through several times already.

Matter and energy did have a beginning.

Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

Energy has no beginning and no end, what part of "can neither be created nor destroyed" don't you understand? Your video said nothing about energy having a beginning.

Actually it did.

But if you want to hear it more explicitly...

Except positive energy is something, it can be measured, and negative energy is also something and can also be measured, neither is nothing. Your argument is two somethings in equal amounts and in balance are suddenly nothing.

You mean the position of every leading cosmologist? Yes. That is what they believe. The net energy of a closed system is zero.

Again that does not mean that energy is NO THING!!!!
It means the THING called positive energy and the THING called negative energy are in BALANCE. Both THINGS exist at the same time in equal measurable amounts.

 

[edthecynic]

Well, you removed one of his words making it a little less stilted.
A better way to state it in conformance to the FLoT would be, "from nothing no thing comes."

Or if you prefer a more in depth discussion...

Again it is the same thing, nowhere in that video does he argue that ENERGY has a beginning. YOU are basically arguing that if the universe had a beginning then energy had a beginning, an argument none of your videos makes.
Again, the FLoT states that energy can neither be created (has no beginning) nor destroyed (has no end).

Space and time is energy and matter.

You left out two critical words, "IN MOTION."
As has been pointed out to you many times before, tine exists ONLY in terms of motion.

No, Ed. You don't know what you are talking about.

Time can be said to be the measure of the expansion of the universe.

When I say space and time it is meant to imply space time.

There was no time before the universe began because there was no space time.

Get with the program Ed.

You can't make up your own physics. If there is no motion there is no time. Please show just ONE physics equation for time that does not involve motion.
You can't and you know it.