>>13916394Nothing is something, its the smallest conceivable amount of anything and everything, because if you reduce everything as far as conceivably possible, you are still left with nothing. If the only boundary or limit to nothing is nothing itself and more nothing can come from nothing as you asserted, then that means given enough time, anything and everything MUST eventually accumulate from purely nothing bound by nothing.
>>13916499OP said nothing comes from nothing, not that nothing comes from God or God comes from nothing, God comes from itself, just like nothing comes from itself.
>>13916546>The prime mover didn't "come from" you simpleton, he/it has always beenNothing has always been and it exists everywhere, if you try to find everything that exists in some limited space, you will find materials and energy x1, x2, ..., xx all the way until you are left with nothing else, meaning nothing is everywhere all the time, so why can't nothing be the "prime mover"?
>>13916575Even if you assume there is no beginning point, the beginning is still nothing.
>>13917162Except that by definition, nothing is a certain amount of everything, you can't draw a 3D axis without connecting all the disconnected dimensions at the point they have in common, nothing, the zero point.
>>13917247Ok, that is a fine explanation of each universe, but the overarching multiverse still came from nothing.
>>13917258Nothing exists everywhere and is easily measured, every piece of equipment that can detect any physical metric has to be calibrated to distinguish nothing from some amount of physical measurement.
