I dislike the way the answer to the question:
"Why is there something rather than nothing?" is formed.
Saying "spontaneous quantum fluctuation" is analogous to saying "the word of God."
Simply put, "It just happened" is not a satisfactory answer.
Particularly where Nothing is concerned. If we say something was created out a vacum, we infer that there was something to which there could be an abscence of.
That is to say: "something was not there and then something arose."
This is quite different from saying, nothing was - UNTIL!!!
Obviously then, 'something' has existed forever. If quantum fluctuations were possible in this pre-universe concept, then, given an infinite amount of time, they were inevitable.
If they were inevitable, they existed. Even as a possibility, even in some 'future' (in which case we actually would then have time existing).
I don't buy it folks. Your answer says that there is something because something happened. Thats the snake biting its own tail concept in disguise.
We're going to have to rethink what we mean by 'nothing' here.
And 'instead of' as well.
I don't mind the answer "because it must be" but don't hand me this "because it has to be self-organizing" garbage. For self-organization to occur there has to be a 'self.'
Machines don't arise out of nothingness.
On the other hand, I'm perfectly happy with the concept of nothingness as only a potential and somethingness being the infinite concept.
Self-organization then has, theoretically, an infinite amount of time to occur. And so, will.
Hmmm...Maybe I'm too stuck on semantics.
