I was reminded of that when Jim Holt's book, "Why Does the World Exist?" was discussed on Gödel's Lost Letter blog.
It is not at all clear to me whether the question,
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"is meaningful. I cannot think of what an acceptable answer might look like; and I have a suspicion that the question hides an assumption that makes it impossible for there to be nothing, and so the question is a trivial and frivolous question. For instance, in the Peano axioms for the natural numbers, 1 != 2 follows directly from the axioms, and thus asking "why is 1 !=2?" is frivolous and uninteresting.
dwc · 617 weeks ago
The latest one is here: http://www.ontologia.net/studies/2009/gruenbaum_2...
Balu's take on the same question is here: http://www.hipkapi.com/2011/03/05/the-reality-of-...
macgupta 81p · 617 weeks ago
Also apologies, not sure why the software decided that your comment needed moderation.
macgupta 81p · 617 weeks ago
macgupta 81p · 617 weeks ago
Unfortunately, in the Christian culture of the Occident, both philosophers and ordinary people have inveterately imbibed SoN with their mother’s milk. And it is deeply ingrained even among a good many of those who altogether reject its received theological underpinning. But before Christianity molded the philosophical intuitions of our culture, neither Greek philosophy nor most other world cultures featured SoN (Eliade, 1992). No wonder that Aristotle regarded the material universe as both uncreated and eternal.
----
Maybe the responses to this question is a good probe of how much people have imbibed the philosophical intuitions of Christianity. What is interesting is that this question is entering physics as a legitimate question.
macgupta 81p · 617 weeks ago