"What's the missing word in this paraphrase of Stephen Hawking's statement that the universe has not existed forever? ""It's true because if it were not, all things would be the same ___."""
"A second example is de Sitter space which contains an event horizon. In this case the temperature formula_1 is proportional to the Hubble parameter formula_5, i.e. formula_6. Gibbons–Hawking effect The Gibbons–Hawking effect is the statement that a temperature can be associated to each solution of the Einstein field equations that contains a causal horizon. It is named after Gary Gibbons and Stephen Hawking. The term ""causal horizon"" does not necessarily refer to event horizons only, but could also stand for the horizon of the visible universe, for instance. For example, Schwarzschild spacetime contains an event horizon and so can be"
"impossible to count down from infinity, and that, had the universe existed for an infinite amount of time, every possible event, including the final end of the universe, would already have occurred. He therefore states his argument in three points- firstly, everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence; secondly, the universe began to exist; so, thirdly, therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence. A response to this argument would be that the cause of the universe's existence (God) would need a cause for its existence, which, in turn, could be responded to as being"
"""""Something exists."""", and Statement 2. """"Statement 1. conveys no information."""" lead to the rest. The universe and much of its fundamental physics are inevitable (they are derivable ""a priori"" ), not contingent, empirical or a happenstance. He says that this theory is inconsistent with, among other things, the anthropic principle. The manuscript has been exchanged for years among interested physicists and others, and cited, but as of 2017 it remained unedited and unpublished. He was a member of the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association, a group of physicists and mathematicians who met up in Cambridge in the 1960s and created a"
"or changed from a prior state (the prior state was ""empty space"", or maybe a state that could not be called ""space"" at all). The other view, held by proponents like Stephen Hawking, says that there was no change through time because ""time"" itself emerged along with this universe (in other words, there can be no ""prior"" to the universe). Thus, it remains unclear what combination of ""stuff"", space, or time emerged with the singularity and this universe. One problem in cosmogony is that there is currently no theoretical model that explains the earliest moments of the universe's existence (during"
"finite in time, that is that the Universe has not been around forever, is the solution to the paradox. The fact that the night sky is dark is thus an indication for the Big Bang. By translation invariance, one means independence of (absolute) position, especially when referring to a law of physics, or to the evolution of a physical system. Fundamental laws of physics should not (explicitly) depend on position in space. That would make them quite useless. In some sense, this is also linked to the requirement that experiments should be reproducible. This principle is true for all laws"
"Our universe obviously exists. If the last observer in our universe died and there were no more observers, then the universe would no longer exist. It is inconsistent with the laws of physics for the universe to stop existing; therefore, there must be an ""Omega Point"" that sustains life forever. Tipler's Omega Point ideas have received vigorous criticism by physicists and skeptics. Some critics say its arguments violate the Copernican principle, that it incorrectly applies the laws of probability, and that it is really a theology or metaphysics principle made to sound plausible to laypeople by using the esoteric language"
"fall statements such as """"all bodies are extended"""", """"all bachelors are unmarried"""", and truths of mathematics and logic. Into the second class fall statements like """"the sun rises in the morning"""", and """"all bodies have mass"""". Hume wants to prove that certainty does not exist in science. First, Hume notes that statements of the second type can never be entirely certain, due to the fallibility of our senses, the possibility of deception (see e.g. the modern brain in a vat theory) and other arguments made by philosophical skeptics. It is always logically possible that any given statement about the world"
"time nothing would exist. Some interpreters read Aquinas to mean that assuming an infinite past, all possibilities would be realized and everything would go out of existence. Since this is clearly not the case, then there must be at least one thing that does not have the possibility of going out of existence. However, this explanation seems to involve the fallacy of composition (quantifier shift). Moreover, it does not seem to be in keeping with Aquinas' principle that, among natural things, the destruction of one thing is always the generation of another. Alternatively, one could read Aquinas to be arguing"
"a Universe that has no beginning in time. It is a form of argument from universal causation. Aquinas observed that, in nature, there were things with contingent existences. Since it is possible for such things not to exist, there must be some time at which these things did not in fact exist. Thus, according to Aquinas, there must have been a time when nothing existed. If this is so, there would exist nothing that could bring anything into existence. Contingent beings, therefore, are insufficient to account for the existence of contingent beings: there must exist a ""necessary"" being whose non-existence"
"from physics, where the search for a theory of everything is ongoing, philosophers have discussed the viability of the concept and analyzed its properties and implications. Among the questions to be addressed by a philosophical theory of everything are: ""Why is reality understandable?"" ""Why are the laws of nature as they are?"" ""Why is there anything at all?"" Everything Everything (or every thing) is all that exists; the opposite of nothing, or its complement. It is the totality of things relevant to some subject matter. Without expressed or implied limits, it may refer to anything. The Universe is everything that"
"can be argued that if the force of the Big Bang explosion had been different by 1/10 to the sixtieth power or the strong interaction force was only 5% different, life would be impossible.Renowned physicist Stephen Hawking estimates that ""if the rate of the universe's expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have re-collapsed into a hot fireball due to gravitational attraction."" In terms of a teleological argument, the intuition in relation to a fine-tuned universe would be that God must have been responsible,"
"the universe eternal, has it had a beginning, will it ever end? Aristotle's response, as a Greek, could hardly be affirmative, never having been told of a ""creatio ex nihilo,"" but he also has philosophical reasons for denying that motion had not always existed, on the grounds of the theory presented in the earlier books of the ""Physics"". Eternity of motion is also confirmed by the existence of a substance which is different from all the others in lacking matter; being pure form, it is also in an eternal actuality, not being imperfect in any respect; hence needing not to"
"and with it, brought time into existence, there’s simply no 'before' to consider. Further, Hawking believed the universe could reach an end point, either through an eventual cosmic ""crunch or an expansion"" ... ""In the interim ... We are all time travelers, journeying together into the future. But let us make that future a place we want to visit”), the possibility of time travel (“asking if time travel is possible is a 'very serious question' that our current understanding cannot rule out""), and God (“knowing the mind of God is knowing the laws of nature ... My prediction is that"
"the universe has reached neither a heat death nor a Big Crunch after billions of years requires an explanation. For instance, even at the relatively late age of a few minutes (the time of nucleosynthesis), the density of the universe must have been within one part in 10 of its critical value, or it would not exist as it does today. Physics may conclude that time did not exist before 'Big Bang', but 'started' with the Big Bang and hence there might be no 'beginning', 'before' or potentially 'cause' and instead always existed. Quantum fluctuations, or other laws of physics"
"cannot exist in any other way. String theories appear to allow this situation for certain regions of the universe, but there may be other regions of the universe where more than four dimensions are prominent. Furthermore, supergravity, p-brane and string theories all describe different situations with similar results, as if using different approximations of the same theory. Hawking thus proposes three possibilities: 1) there exists a complete unified theory that we will eventually find; 2) there are an infinite number of theories that overlap and describe the universe more and more accurately and 3) there is no ultimate theory. The"
"billion years ago, when they were all together in one singular extremely dense place. This discovery brought the concept of the beginning of the universe within the province of science. Today, scientists use two partial theories, Einstein's general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics, to describe the workings of the universe. Scientists are still looking for a complete unified theory that would describe everything in the universe. Hawking believes that the discovery of a complete unified theory may not aid the survival of our species, and may not even affect our life-style, but that humanity's deepest desire for knowledge is"
"same senses as the modern English word is used. A term for ""universe"" among the ancient Greek philosophers from Pythagoras onwards was , ""tò pân"" (""the all""), defined as all matter and all space, and , ""tò hólon"" (""all things""), which did not necessarily include the void. Another synonym was , ""ho kósmos"" (meaning the world, the cosmos). Synonyms are also found in Latin authors (""totum"", ""mundus"", ""natura"") and survive in modern languages, e.g., the German words ""Das All"", ""Weltall"", and ""Natur"" for ""Universe"". The same synonyms are found in English, such as everything (as in the theory of everything),"
"explain this 'always' … Let this conclude what we have to say in support of our contention that there never was a time when there was not motion, and never will be a time when there will not be motion. (""Physics"" VIII, 2) The purpose of Aristotle's cosmological argument, that at least one eternal unmoved mover must exist, is to support everyday change. Of things that exist, substances are the first. But if substances can, then all things can perish... and yet, time and change cannot. Now, the only continuous change is that of place, and the only continuous change"
"the scientists keep telling us, is a universe, which is disposable. You know it might be just this one anonymous glory of all things, this rich stone forest, this epic chant, this gaiety, this grand choiring shout of affirmation, which we choose when all our cities are dust, to stand intact, to mark where we have been, to testify to what we had it in us, to accomplish. Our works in stone, in paint, in print are spared, some of them for a few decades, or a millennium or two, but everything must finally fall in war or wear away"
"five elements. All Matter is composed of those five elements, mixed in proportions determined by the Form. Every Substance is fulfilling its ideal Form, ""morphe"", which ""exists"" separately from the Matter, ""hile"", but appears only in Substance. There's no evolution in nature. Nature is teleological and has a purpose. The Sun and all the planets are circling Earth, and they move not in vacuum but in aether. Diseases are the signs of mind's insanity, the weakness of Form. Forms determine Matters, and human will can change Forms. Thus, the human mind is able to shape reality in indirect way, to"
"the ""theory of everything"" (which Hawking predicts to be solved by ""the end of this century"") and, based on quantum mechanics, considers empty space as filled with virtual particles, ""popping into and out of existence"", suggesting our entire universe began as one of those particles, and additionally, that our cosmos is ""just a miniscule bubble in an infinite ocean, or 'multiverse'"". In this regard, Horgan refers to the concern of German physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, in her 2018 book """"Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray"""", that ""physicists working on strings and multiverses are not really practicing physics,"" and quotes"
"justification enough for our continuing quest. and that our goal is nothing less than a complete description of the universe we live in."" Stephen Hawking talks about how the Aristotle theory of absolute space came to an end by the Newton's theory that 'rest' and 'motion' can be the same state if an observer sees the event at rest or if he moves with the same speed as that of the event. So 'rest' can't be the standard position. Moreover, Galileo Galilei also disproves Aristotle theory that heavier body falls more quickly than the lighter one just because of its"
"the cat that lands, to use an illustration of Barbour's. The seething nebula of molecules of which we, cats, and all matter are made is ceaselessly rearranging at incomprehensibly fast speeds. The microcosm metamorphoses constantly, therefore one must deny there is any sense to say a cat or a person persists through time. Early on, Barbour addresses the charge that writing with tensed verbs disproves his proposal. The next revolution in physics will undermine speaking in terms of time, he says, but there is no alternative. If a universe is composed of timeless instants in the sense of configurations of"
"the world was impossible and that ""all infinites are equal"" (Dales 298). Harclay addresses these issues in ""Ordinary Questions XVIII"" and asks, ""Could the world have existed from all eternity?"" (Harclay 735). He presents three opposing theories, and supports the one that claims ""the world and movement could have existed from all eternity"" and states that ""God [has] the power to do anything that is known not to include a contradiction or that is not known to include [one]"" (Harclay 753). Harclay's argument for the univocal concept of being seeks to answer two questions: “whether there is anything univocally common"
"at explaining the universe, using his general proposition ""Because Nothing was, therefore All Things are"". In it, Poe discusses man's relationship to God and the universe or, as he offers at the beginning: ""I design to speak of the Physical, Metaphysical and Mathematical – of the Material and Spiritual Universe: of its Essence, its Origin, its Creation, its Present Condition and its Destiny"". In keeping with this design, Poe concludes ""that space and duration are one"" and that matter and spirit are made of the same essence. Poe suggests that people have a natural tendency to believe in themselves as"
"The reasoning behind existential elimination (∃E) is as follows: If it is given that there exists an element for which the proposition function is true, and if a conclusion can be reached by giving that element an arbitrary name, that conclusion is necessarily true, as long as it does not contain the name. Symbolically, for an arbitrary ""c"" and for a proposition Q in which ""c"" does not appear: formula_15 must be true for all values of ""c"" over the same domain ""X""; else, the logic does not follow: If ""c"" is not arbitrary, and is instead a specific element"
"a possible alternative reality, state, or absence of state. Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle argued that the notion of an uncaused cause was non-sensical, and that the universe was eternal. David Hume argued that, whilst we expect everything to have a cause because of our experience of the necessity of causes, a cause may not be necessary in the case of the formation of the universe, which is outside our experience. Bertrand Russell said ""I should say that the universe is just there, and that's all"", a ""brute fact"" position also taken by physicist Sean Carroll. Philosopher Brian Leftow has argued"
"formula means (roughly) that, in every possible world in which Bill Gates graduated in Medicine, Elvis never died. Since one can easily imagine a world where Bill Gates is a Medicine graduate and Elvis is dead, this formula is false. Hence, this formula seems to be a correct translation of the original sentence. Although the strict conditional is much closer to being able to express natural language conditionals than the material conditional, it has its own problems with consequents that are necessarily true (such as 2 + 2 = 4) or antecedents that are necessarily false. The following sentence, for"
"one supposed that infinite universes existed there should be infinite ways in which observations can be wrong on only one way in which observations can be right at any point in time, for instance, that the color of gems stay the same every time we see them. In other words, if infinite universes existed, then there should be infinite changes to our observations of the universe and in essence be unpredictable in infinite ways, yet this is not what occurs. In a global study on atheism, sociologist Phil Zuckerman noted that though there are positive correlations with societal health among"
"universe had no beginning point then its non-existence might never have been an option. One study has suggested a model that eliminates the initial singularity and predicts that the Universe had no beginning but existed forever as a kind of quantum potential before 'collapsing' into the Big Bang's hot dense state. In other research a possible consequence of ""rainbow gravity"" might be that the universe had no beginning with time stretching back infinitely without an initial singularity and Big Bang. Similarly physics may conclude that time did not exist before the Big Bang, but 'started' with the Big Bang and"
"a follow up article, ""Talking About God"", Goldblatt teases out the ramifications of his conclusion about the impossibility of an actual infinity with respect to the concept of an infinite God. Since we know that the temporal world cannot have existed forever, it therefore must have come into existence ""in the beginning"". It cannot have come into existence without an efficient cause (since that would violate the law of causality, one of the basic laws of thought). That First Cause, Goldblatt states, following the Cosmological Argument of Thomas Aquinas, is what all men call God. But this realization leads to"
"relations do not exist independently of the people. Leibniz argued that space could not exist independently of objects in the world because that implies a difference between two universes exactly alike except for the location of the material world in each universe. But since there would be no observational way of telling these universes apart then, according to the identity of indiscernibles, there would be no real difference between them. According to the principle of sufficient reason, any theory of space that implied that there could be these two possible universes must therefore be wrong. Newton took space to be"
"one does not know why things ""are"" in the first place or why it exists. The reason is that the universe depends on a different principle called ""identity"", and which is essentially God. Disconnect the world with that identity, and a large part of reality will lose its sense, for there is a third principle, the so-called ""transcendental causality"" which links up persistence and identity by placing the latter as creator of the former. In this way, Polo thinks that ""Access to Being"" brings metaphysics back in its right historical track. Some medievals, and particularly Aquinas, conceived being as a"