Everything has a cause and an effect, right? So, why do things exist? I mean, yeah, everything started with the Big Bang, but what caused the Big Bang? You can say it was other Universes crashing into themselves, but then, how did those former Universes came to be? Some say they have always been there and everything is cyclic, but doesn't that ruin the laws of causality? If not, how did that cycle came to be? It can't have always been there, and it can't have just came to existence out of nowhere. So to me, if our current framework is correct, then things shouldn't exist. There's no reason for timespace, energy, matter and everything else to exist. Things shouldn't exist. But since they exist and assuming the laws of cause and effect are true, then it suddenly makes perfect sense to admit that an almighty mythical creature like God exists and He's the one running this show. The final possibility is just that there's something inherent to the human thinking that makes us think everything has a cause and effect. If we are wrong, then suddenly the models we propose make sense, since we're just mistakenly assuming everything has cause and effect. But then, how did science get here in the first place, when one of its fundamental principles is cause and effect?
Why do things exist?
Somebody clearly hasn't seen "the entire history of the world, i guess."
>youtube.com
You're welcome.
1. Which god?
2. Out of the thousands invented, how do you know it's that particular god?
3. Why does that god exist?
Look. I already watched this video. The very idea of a Big Bang doesn't make any sense. Was it a nothing that somehow became an everything? Or was it an everything that was always just there somehow? If the former, what made nothing become everything, and if the latter, what created this every thing that was always there? This doesn't answer any point in the OP at all. Cause and effect.
Congratulations! You have stumbled upon the ultimate mystery of the universe, a wizard approaches you and asks what you would prefer a demon-slaying sword or an all-healing elixir. What do you choose?
Are you high, son
m.youtube.com
The final "reason" you listed maj just be onto something
The Big Bang was a "something" that became everything.
Quantum physics proves what we call logic and reason only works on macroscopic level at the subatomic level even causality gets screwed with such mind breaking concepts like retrocausality or something in the future changing how it acts in the past, or quantum entanglement which ignores the concept of distance.
If you went down to the planck level it would be pure nonsense with no rhyme or reason thus the universe appearing from nowhere in a strange sense is actually logical.
To expand on this user's point, things at the quantum level are at such a information/spacetime density that their probabilities become highly erratic and they act in literally unpredictable ways (see heisenberg's uncertainty principle), but the macroscopic collection of these erratic probability wave functions cancel each other often enough that the universe appears for the most part to have fairly regular dynamics and structure, but this will likely change as the universe expands.
Congrats for finding the Question, now take some DMT and find the answer
Care to explain better? What you said sounds interesting but it doesn't make any sense. How is it even possible to logically conclude logic is wrong? If logic is wrong, how can you be right? If it's right, how did you conclude it's wrong? And regardless, this doesn't change the point made. I asked why do things exist, your final answer is "the universe appearing from nowhere in a strange sense is actually logical.". Just how exactly did it happen?
So before the Universe came into existence, there was some very small turds that caused it to happen? Where did that small shit come from? Who wrote the laws of physics and everything? Did they come to be before, during or after the Big Bang?
It's hard for a human mind like my own to accept that things just sort of happened.
Your first task is to answer these three questions:
When you realise that you can't, then you will be in a position to throw your god out the window.
The fact is that at present this is a question for which we don't have the answer. Fabricating an invisible guy with a magic wand, whose origin is not explained, and saying "he did it" does not answer the question.
>Your first task is to answer these three questions:
I skipped that post completely because I assumed it was a given its poster simply did not understand the whole point and was not worth the time explaining what I meant. I said one of the possibilities is some kind of god existing because otherwise we're in an infinite chain of causes. "What caused X? Y. Then what caused Y? Z. Then what caused Z?" and this goes on forever. This could be easily solved by assuming that a supernatural god who has always existed and created everything for whatever reason in fact exists. Thus questions 1 and 2 are just irrelevant (whatever answers they are, they don't matter), and 3 remains answered. I'm not sure if I am being clear, to me it makes obvious sense in my head so I hope I'm being sound here.
>When you realise that you can't, then you will be in a position to throw your god out the window.
I don't think there's a spiritual world or anything like that unfortunately, although I wish very much and can only hope such things exist. What I can't, as of now, throw out of the window, is the notion everything has cause and effect. When concepts like retrocausality, Planck level and such things were being mentioned, it was as logical and reasonable to me as Shintoism, Totemism or any other animist religion.
>Fabricating an invisible guy with a magic wand, whose origin is not explained, and saying "he did it" does not answer the question.
I might be playing the devil's advocate here, but I was saying, it does, if we assume this god is really almighty in the sense he doesn't have an origin and, for some reason, he has always existed. But then again, you could swap this god for whatever theoretical Physics models you have.
>Everything has a cause and an effect, right?
No, cause and effect does not apply to small scales and extreme conditions.
>but what caused the Big Bang?
We don't know. We don't evenknow that it was caused. It could just be random.
>Some say they have always been there and everything is cyclic, but doesn't that ruin the laws of causality?
First of all, why would you expect a law which only describes certain things inside the universe to apply to the universe itself? That's just bad logic.
>It can't have always been there
Why? There's nothing wrong with infinite regression.
>So to me, if our current framework is correct, then things shouldn't exist. There's no reason for timespace, energy, matter and everything else to exist. Things shouldn't exist.
There's a big difference between "no reason" and "should not." Sound not implies there is a reason the universe should not exist. There is neither a reason for it existing nor a reason for it not to exist. It just is.
>But since they exist and assuming the laws of cause and effect are true, then it suddenly makes perfect sense to admit that an almighty mythical creature like God exists and He's the one running this show.
Well no, because God breaks cause and effect even more than an universe which was not caused. God is not caused and does stuff by magic. Anything you allege necessitates an intelligent magic god can much more simply be ascribed to a non-intelligent universe that simply operates according to some set of principles which we are trying to figure out. Religious people are just trying to shoehorn in their ancient meme into this process for their own satisfaction, to say "aha I was right all along."
>if we assume this god is really almighty in the sense he doesn't have an origin and, for some reason, he has always existed.
Why would you assume that? The scientific term for this is "making shit up".
I won't argue any further because I have American high school level education and am not that interested. You can call this a victory or whatever. All I can say is it's very hard to accept reality as it is. It's difficult to accept there's no afterlife, that life has no purpose, that there is nobody watching you, that what we call life, our existence, our experiences, are all more or less illusions set up by chemicals. It's hard to accept all of that and makes me ask, isn't there something else? Something divine, righteous, meaningful? But then I remind myself that this very thought is only a natural reaction, kind of "programmed" to happen when facing these things. If this is reality, then it is depressive by human standards.
First you won the lottery by being born. Then you won the lottery again by being born human. Then you won it again by being born in this era, and not 500 or 5000 years ago. Then you won it again by living in a first world country. Your standard of living is better than 99% of people who have ever lived and your life expectancy is the highest it has ever been for our species.
And you are communicating your woes on a medium which could fairly be described as one of the greatest inventions in the history of our species.
How much is enough? Perspective, m8.
Have you tried going to a church? You're more likely to find what you are looking for there than this crap imageboard.
You're right. He's looking for bullshit and church is exactly where he will find it.
Self-pity, the post.
>It can't have always been there
Define "always"
en.wikipedia.org
Everything that comes to be needs a cause, a thing that has always existed, be it God or the fundamentals of the universe, doesn't.
The only thing that is real are massless "particles" (which aren't particles but really a cloud of possibilities) that want to travel at light speed. Each particle represents... agh, for lack of a better way to describe it, I'll say "mathematical function" although that just describes it, not what it is (if asking "what" such a thing is even makes sense).
For these particles, there is no time, no causality. They don't have color, shape or form-- those are all epiphenomena known only by we who experience mass. Within their own frame, they proceed from instant to instant, logging new interactions with other particles into their history.
If you could experience it from the inside, maybe by "inhabiting" or "possessing" one of those particles, all you'd experience is a stream of random-seeming "numbers" (not sure they'd be numbers, but it'd be whatever kind of information it is that represents quantum entanglements). There'd be no gaps, no waiting between these interactions, because there'd be no time. There might be space, but it wouldn't be the smooth continuous thing we know of now-- it'd be a sharply delineated set of coordinates, moved through in sharp staccato bursts, angular due to reflection rather than the smooth easing motions that are possible in our reality. If a particle has a trajectory that never puts it in a position to interact with any other particle ever again (if that's even possible), there'd just be nothing-- a total cessation of being. A completed function.
jews created this universe to scam good goyim.
>On a B-Theory of time, the universe does not in fact come into being or become actual at the Big Bang; it just exists tenselessly as a four-dimensional space-time block that is finitely extended in the earlier than direction. If time is tenseless, then the universe never really comes into being, and, therefore, the quest for a cause of its coming into being is misconceived.
Christcucks btfo
Now, there's something that exists called the Higgs field. I don't completely understand it yet, but it somehow captures subatomic particles and makes it so that they have "mass". Particles are always traveling from one instant to the next, but the higgs field pretty much forces them to stay in the same place.
Not only does this allow these particles to form matter as we know it, but it *seems* (I may have this very wrong) that this also gives rise to time itself: with that many interactions being logged in such a small space, we begin to experience the world as a smooth continuous space, a constant stream of analog information that may vary very little from instant to instant, but still enough to make each instant unique.
This has been a long explanation, but my point is that our reality is made up of information. The fundamental unit of existence could probably be thought of as the answer to a yes or no question.
(I'm not saying the universe is a simulation. That's retarded. A lot of the things these matrix-kids point to as "optimizations" would be slow as fuck because quantum systems often contain far more information than their classical counterparts. That's why quantum computers are even a thing at all. If there's an "outside" world beyond this one, its fundamental nature isn't one that takes classical mechanics to the subatomic level, I can tell you that much.)
The reason I think the Higgs field gives rise to time is that it forces particles to interact with others constantly, rather than just being something that happens whenever its done travelling however many light years until it gets close enough to something else. Lots of people visualize the Higgs field as an egg shell with particles bouncing around inside of it, and I guess that works. They explain time dilation as the motion of the "eggshell" making them take longer to reach the other side of the eggshell, and it works as a tool to help you understand it, but it's probably not how it really works-- what's probably really going on is that time and distance travelled are on some fundamental level the same thing. All matter is always "traveling" at the same speed, which is the speed of light, all the time, if it looks like it's standing still it's because that motion is going through time. (though time is kind of an illusion... it's just a LOT of information being generated in a relatively small spatial area by the particles somehow being trapped there.)
Anyway, I'm done being all physicist for now, and I'll finally answer OPs question.
Things exist because you experience them. The universe tells you that it is, every moment saturated with at least that much of the truth. If you want to think yourself into a void where you doubt everything, go right ahead. But should you turn and face it, it will reveal itself in all its fearsome glory.
Wake up.
I realize I seem to contradict myself all the time, but that's just because our metaphors break down. We simply don't yet have the words to really express what's actually going on.
People exist because life exists, and life exists because [etc...] at one point there was nothing.
>How is it even possible to logically conclude logic is wrong? If logic is wrong, how can you be right? If it's right, how did you conclude it's wrong?
Him calling that "logic" is probably wrong, since what he's describing isn't logic-- it could be better described as "intuition" I think. We think that mass, for example, is this fundamental thing, when it's really encapsulated be the behavior of the Higgs field.
Logic itself, however, is kind of a weird thing. It is conceivable that logic itself is wrong, we can imagine an Alice in Wonderland reality that violates our logic and doesn't even follow its own rules etc. The thing with logic is that in order to use it, you kind of have to believe in it. And we can observe that when we use it, it tends to make things work for us.
A lot of people therefore assume that "logic" is the fundamental mode of operation for all reality, but there's nothing that really indicates that to me a priori. It's possible that a "logical" situation is just one where intelligence can exist at all, because it allows patterns to form that last long enough to become conscious due to its consistent rules.
Not sure if you are still here OP, but our best understanding about where the universe came from is that it came from an infinite state of almost nothingness that has always been. It is beyond our capability as humans to understand the true workings of this phenomenon with our 5 senses.
Trust me, it is fruitless to look further into this, yes it's fucked up that we are here but it is also awesome and great and for some it is awful and just suffering, life is cray like that.
And ultimately, there will be a time where everything in the universe is dead. So think of your life and reality as a wonderful accident and make the best of it because I can assure you that when you are dead, you are dead for eternity.
because there was a chance in eternity
we know the big bang did happen
we dont know anything about time before the big bang
so i think its like a probability of a big bang event happening and given infinite time it would eventually happen exactly like this infinite times (also possibly a multitude of other ways)
If you have a high school level education, you really shouldn't discuss something like this. You won't understand. We just end up doing the "this is how it is" and then you say "I don't get it" or "I don't accept that". There is no way to communicate the understanding of physics gained after studying it for years to someone in a few paragraphs. If you wish to know how the world and reality works, study physics. If not, don't talk about it and don't think about it.
Whose to say we actually exist? What if this is all just nothing, and you, your mind, and your consciousness, as well as my own, are just absolutely nothing?
The existence of everything is utterly absurd.
>Everything has a cause and an effect, right?
Proof it.
>But since they exist and assuming the laws of cause and effect are true, then it suddenly makes perfect sense to admit that an almighty mythical creature like God exists and He's the one running this show.
No, that doesn't make sense at all.
>But then, how did science get here in the first place, when one of its fundamental principles is cause and effect?
It's a principle that seems to hold all the time in the current universe, which is very different from the universe at its very beginning. Although even now there's evidence that quantum events are truly random, i.e. there's nothing that "causes" some particles to take on a certain state rather than another.
Nobody knows what existed before the Big Bang or not or if there is such a time as before the BB.
If the universe is a closed system...
The big bang caused the big bang.
If the universe is a lossy system or a gainy system then we are either the prime generator ir the sub generated.
"Is not an artist a God in his own world? Every thought and emotion he has destroying and creating new characters and settings on a whim? Oh how terrible, oh how grand, for if the micro copies the macro is God not doing the same?"
-user
This is more of a philosophical question, than a scientific question. We could tell you how things exist, not the why.
I used to think like this until I studied a bit of what the Big Bang Theory is. First study what Big Bang Theory is.
According to theory there was no "time" before big bang. So, your point is invalid. Think of it for a second. If there was no "time" before Big Bang, then how come something really exist.
How do we know some object exists? The answer is simple it may occupy some space it must travel forward in time. If we put our attention in the theory, even space didn't existed before Big Bang.
I have heard people making an argument about how about the time before Big Bang. And I say in the response"Can't you fucking see, there was no time and space before Big Bang. So, to tell a time before Big Bang is non-sense."
The funny thing is he never bought a ticket.
Because no one would choose to suffer
Cough, cough....
Jesus Christ.
Ghandi.
MLK
See how beautiful is god just one mistake in all of this, one mistake in the math, physics, and chemistry and life will never be as you are seeing right now, we should be grateful to our god who make all of this possible
>why do things exist
The more you know about the universe, the less sense it makes to ask this question. Things don't really exist, persay
>everything has a cause and effect
I believe this is just the human brain coming to terms with the fact that it's main path to perceiving reality doesn't exactly reflect reality. This is us getting closing to understanding the structure of the universe. If there's a beginning, then it's an arbitrary beginning. The arbitrary beginning about 13ish billion years ago. It just has to be SOME time, the specific time is arbitrary, just as we use arbitrary measurements to define feet and kilograms. The universe seems to be static in nature, meaning that there exists uncertainty for the individual parts of the universe, but on a global scale, nothing is uncertain. The 4d block universe is the best way to describe the universe user; past, present, and future exist in the same space. If you're going to kill yourself, you were always going to kill yourself. If you don't, you were always going to stay away from it. The uncertainty arises from the fact that we tend to think of the universe as separate from us, but in reality, our attempts to understand the universe are just more actions of the universe itself.
>things shouldn't exist
What makes you think this? It looks like your ego assumes it's a separate entity from the universe
short answer: it's not
Reminds me again how people deal with suicide. They assume the default of reality is non existence, when the only thing that can really be interpreted from reality is that both non-existence and existence are parts of the duality. The universe is entirely balanced except just infinitesimally off my alittle bit, and that's how I explain time. Time is an illusion itself. To have an idea of nonexistence, one must first obtain the idea of existence. There's an unavoidable duality to the universe, it makes sense. There's no world without you, no you without the world. No good without bad
Well, if nothing existed, it would be an awful waste of space.
> It's difficult to accept there's no afterlife, that life has no purpose, that there is nobody watching you
no it's not.
i fail to understand how anyone could believe otherwise other than denial, fear and ignorance.
our theories are consistent if the big bang was initiated at quantum level, because there exists quantum phenomena that violate causality.
Well, sort of.
They don't violate causality so much as exist completely outside of it.
SR itself gives you causality violations right away on the macro level, just by the fact that two different observers can disagree as to the order of events. QP closes some of those holes, while making others.
Causality simply isn't as inviolable as we like to think, even it is generally is the rule for each observer.
Please do not supplement your retarded shitposting with cute pictures of Cirno.
> assuring death is eternal
Haven't read your PDF yet but I've never read anything anywhere that made it appear that SR allows violation of causality without being strongly discredited.
>Everything has a cause and an effect, right?
No.
Suppose things didn't exist. Then who would ask the question of "what things exist?"
There are actually an infinite number of realities where nothing exists, we just happen to live in the reality where things exist. If we lived in the reality where nothing existed then we wouldn't exist to posit the question "why do things exist?. Therefore if there are infinite realities where things either exist or don't exist, then we will always exist in the universe where existence is possible.
Then you've read nothing on SR, as shit happening out of order to different observers is a core concept and a fundamental effect.
There's probably lots of things that you won't like the "feel" of in the field of physics, that nonetheless happen.
What a baka.