… if the existence-potential never existed in the first place?
I stumbled onto this argument when someone brought up quantum mechanics claiming to get an existant, from an absolute always non-existant-thing. We were talking about light and all of a sudden all this shit started coming out of my mouth and I was like… wow!
So while we were arguing. I finally came to the conclusion that: You can’t have the chance to exist, if the existence-potential never existed in the first place,.
Therefore existence, and the potential to exist, must always exist, all of the time. Else nothing, including science, can ever exist at any time.
QM is a subset of logic. So this is this question: Was there a time, when time and energy and it’s potential to exist, absolutely-never existed? It seems to be all the justification we need. i.e. either it absolutely never existed, or existence and existence potentials always exist all of the time.
Actually no, things have potential energy. In quantum mechanics potentials are real. Are you saying that things can’t store potential energy? Because it’s an independently measurable one sorry.
Potential is the same as probability, and possiblity. You just said “no possiblities exist”, or everything is impossible.
That has nothing to do with what I said. We were talking about existing. If you never have the potential to exist, the future can never potentially exist.
Um, Super - this makes no sense, I am afraid. None of this “exists”.
Potential is just a judgement we make based on induction. We know that acorns are potential oak trees only because of the past - because of induction. Induction is about the past - only our judgements, our guesses, are about the future. Guesses are not oak trees. And no oak tree exists in the future - that’s just a nonsensical thing to say.
Also, to say that no possibilites exist is not to say that everything is impossible. This is just a misunderstanding of language. You have added “things” to the mix in the second part of your sentence. Things (and certainly those that already exist) are possible - but possibilty itself does not exist - it is not itself a thing. You are just tripping over words here.
I am only restating and expanding upon what Imp poested, but I though “what the heck”.
well what if one thing alone didnt have the potential in the first place, then combined with another that didnt have the potential at all and formed potential.
You’ve misunderstood, we’re talking about ACTUAL-EXISTANTS, i.e. in QM you get ACTUAL ENERGY, when we say something has potential energy, it ACTUALLY the energy. Not that theenergy never exists.
Math is the foundation of science… and I know QM is not quite emprical, but that is irrelevant to the question of getting a something-exist, from the all-null-set like QM people like to claim.
I think I misunderstood because of the forum you chose to post on. What QM says about the universe is just what they say and nothing more. They are also seemingly constantly tempted to cross paradigms. I think that is a mistake.
The answer is no and the only thing you will ever get out of quantum ‘mechanics’ are hoaxes, such as black holes and neutron stars. In the center of the galaxy there are just a large quantity of stars compared to the spiral arm stars. As stars drift away or move closer to other stars, other stars may form in between them, so this balancing act of stars creates a ‘spiral’ shape.
You cannot and will never understand the universe with math. Math is just an estimation tool, it is nothing more than that.
The problem is “what is potential”? Potential could be viewed as a mental concept of what possible outcome is compossible with what preceding state. Like if you have a helicopter, you have the potential to fly, but the potential wouldn’t exist in-and-of itself, it would just be a concept about prediction. Potential would be an abstraction over state-of-things and the laws of physics. Or if potential is a thing in itself, it has to be answered what that thing is. Why does it exist, and is it eternal? It comes down to what is the default state of potential. Does potential limit what’s possible, or enable what’s possible? Is your potential to fly limited by gravity and your body, or is it enabled by the helicopter? If things limit potential, and potential makes sense outside of reality, i.e. it’s a thing-in-itself, then non-existence is the ultimate breeding ground for the possibility of anything and everything.
One thought I had a few years ago, is that in the absence of anything, there is the absence of factors/circumstance to determine whether existence is potential/possible or not, and therefore both possibilities manifest: existence and non-existence… what we experience as existence is the existence side of things.
