A
Anonymous05/14/26, 02:45No.16975770
Q: what caused the big bang?
A: nothing caused the big bang because causality is a feature of the universe and the big bang was the beginning of the universe, therefore the laws of the universe don’t apply to it.
60
Replies
A
Anon05/14/26, 02:54No.16975773
you couldn't possibly know if causality did or didn't work before the beginning of the universe
A
Anon05/14/26, 04:32No.16975810
Okay so just say "God did it" at this point if you're going to imply something more fundamental than causality created causality.
A
Anon05/14/26, 06:38No.16975853
Incompleteness proved that a universe is mathematically and physically impossible, no logical system can contain all truths and no physical container can contain all physical objects.
A
Anon05/14/26, 07:30No.16975870
People aren't complex enough to relate to each other here but contain enough complexity to achieve that. The standoff means there's a difference in being here from where they came from.
A
Anon05/14/26, 09:04No.16975888
You are an angry retard with no argument, stop pretending like your flagrant ad hominem non sequiturs contain some kind of logical reasoning.
A
Anon05/14/26, 09:29No.16975896
>causality is not a fundamental feature of nature
Ok.>causality is a feature of the universe
Proof? You've just established that nature can do without it. Or were you implying the Big Bunga was a supernatural creation myth?
A
Anon05/14/26, 10:53No.16975952
The only correct answer is "we don't know."
A
Anon05/14/26, 11:11No.16975966
>nothing caused the big bang because causality is a feature of the universe
this demotes causality from an ontologically significant principle to an untestable pseudo-empirical assertion. you've basically cut it off from any philosophical support and left it to be torn apart by empricist skeptics, its worthless remains to be picked up only by pop-sci midwits (like you). good job, OP. you've outdone being a faggot
A
Anon05/14/26, 11:16No.16975969
>but you can't heckin' quantify the word!!!!
OP is such a faggot he's gonna argue with this fucktard unironically
A
Anon05/14/26, 11:17No.16975972
>A system used to describe an interaction does not imply the system does not apply elsewhere.
>And I never said an AND gate is boolean logic. I said a particular configuration of transistors can only be called that within the confines of that logical system.
Holy kek.
A
Anon05/14/26, 11:20No.16975974
>illogical means lacking logical infrastructure
A
Anon05/14/26, 11:22No.16975976
>"everything" can't ever possibly be every thing because it is actually an incomplete description of things, some things can't even really be categorized as things
A
Anon05/14/26, 11:24No.16975977
>you essentially said red was made of blood when you said boolean algebra was a system of transistor interaction
A
Anon05/14/26, 11:41No.16975985
>So you do still think boolean logic is a property of transistors rather than a property of logic even though its explicitly called boolean logic instead of boolean transistor system?
A
Anon05/14/26, 12:09No.16975997
>you think you can make a complete description of reality simply by calling it everything even though that has been mathematically proven to be impossible.
A
Anon05/14/26, 12:24No.16976017
Causality is just another manmade creation to understand our existence. We want to strictly believe that A leads to B. It gives our lives meaning. It justifies our big brains. Causality may the most important theory of science but only because it is the first abstract idea we had.
A
Anon05/14/26, 12:45No.16976032
>The definition of a set does not say anything about the knowability of the members contained within it.
the sheer density of pseudbabble ITT is amazing. post after post of this shit. i love it
A
Anon05/15/26, 07:23No.16976386
Original poster here. Holy kek, reported so you can cry yourself to sleep.