How many here missed the point, that you can't apply current laws of the universe to when they didn't exist?

Question

Here is the original post.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AspdwS334z730cdKSwNQZVDzy6IX?qid=20060914134949AAl6pMH

These people are thinking in the NOW.... they are trying to say that nothing cannot come from something because it cannot do so now due to the laws that currently exist in the universe. My speculation was these laws did not exist prior to the universes beginning. Trying to think about current laws in a time when they don't apply is totally missing the point.

Answer 1

My response to this question is similar to my response to the question you refer to. (I say "response" and not "answer" because the latter implies that there is a RIGHT and a WRONG while the former requires only a statement. I don't think there are RIGHT and WRONG answers to the theoretical and often rhetorical questions that are asked so frequently in this particular category of Yahoo! Answers.)

The people you think are "missing the point" of your last question are the people who have difficulty grasping the concept of NOTHING.

People who understand NOTHING know that you can't apply laws -- nor anything else for that matter -- to NOTHING because there is NOTHING there to apply it to.

Answer 2

I don't think there WAS a time when they didn't apply. Think about an actual, man-made law for a moment. Let's say it's against murder. Now let's say that there are no murders. Not that there wont be any in the future, just none right now. The law still exists, and will come into play when a murder happens. It's just sitting there waiting at the moment.

Of course, I also don't think that the universe came from nothing. My views on that are best explained by the first law of thermodynamics.

Answer 3

I didn't miss the point. At some point in the logic line, something has to come from nothing. Either it goes -> God -> Universe, or -> Universe. I like the -> Universe idea, particularly since the idea of god is a) ridiculous b) pointless and unneccessary. Furthermore, "knowing him/her/it" is even more ludicrous.

The alternative to this idea is the idea of infinite causes, which may be possible in the "outside universe", but I'm sure all the major monotheistic religions would be angry if you told them you believed in "infinite gods."

Answer 4

Who says the laws of the universe didn't exist? The first thing you need to do is demonstrate that there WAS such a time, THEN ask the question. Lacking that, you may as well try to catch a fart and paint it green.

Answer 5

I've an idea that physics could be different at different places in the galaxy. We only know what things are like here. I know speed and time are related, right? They say that a man who travels at the speed of light will not age normally. Aren't we adapted to the spin and rotation of our planet? Leaving our adapted 'velocity zone' could cause us physiological problems. I wonder if this is what 'space-sickness' is.

Answer 6

how exactly does the something cannot come from nothing argument even apply to G-d? G-d does not exist. G-d is what underlies existence.

Answer 7

well isnt the defintion of a law something that has always been in place, something that is concrete, like half the stuff that spews forth for logic in science these days.

Answer 8

It takes more faith to believe in that than in the Bible, because there is absolutely no information whatsoever to substatiate that hypothesis. But if you are really that determined to deny the reality of God's existence, don't let us slow you down...

Answer 9

i think you are right, before the big bang, it was total chaos cuz there were no laws to govern anything - physics, etc.

the universe was one big cluster-f**k