it may very well be the case that the unierse and existence, in one form or anohter has always been in existence. perhaps it is a fundamental characteristic of man, who is born ad dies, who is unable ot fully comprehend or come to terms with existence. to the extent that the question "why is there something instead of nohting" is in truth, more a question of "why do i exist, instead of not existing?"
if existence has always been here, then the question of origination is moot.
and if that can be assumed, (and assumption and questioning of assumption is the basis of any good inquisition) then perhaps that understnding can vitally change the nature of our questioning in terms of cosmology and other scientific processes, and events in the universe.
perhaps there has always been existence, but not always "time"
perhaps there has always been the basic constituents of time, but existence came later?
both propositions so fundamentally change what has been put together and how we understand it, as to render our minds perhaps incapable of an actual inquisition.
yet, this is where science stops and humanity begins, for the meanign to be derived from things we do not understand, and the meaning things have when we do not understand, still holds an incredible amount of meaning to us. the implications of such meanings, are perhaps more valuable than the actual answer.
for in a basic sense, what anything means to us, is of ultimate importance.
No comments:
Post a Comment