We spend a lot of time talking about god's existence, but we have never really specified what is required for existence.
Here's my proposition.
A - The universe is defined as everything that exists.
A1 - Therefore, the universe is the domain in which existence is possible.
A2 - Equally, existence amounts to finding a subset of the universe.
That is, find a cluster of particles in the universe, give them a name X and then you may say "X exists".
Furthermore, I propose:
B - In order for something to exist, it must exist in a specific location.
This follows from A2, since some piece of mass in the universe has a specific location.
C - In order for something to exist, its size must be finite.
This follows partly from B, location can only have meaning if the size is not infinite.
C1 - In particular, it means that if something were to exists of infinite size, it would consist of all the particles of the universe itself and it would automatically be the universe.
C2 - In consequence, something that exists cannot be defined in terms of the size of the universe (eg. half the size of the universe), because infinity/2 = infinity.
D - In order for something to exist, it must exists in a specific finite time interval, shorter than the time of the universe.
This is analogous to C. If something were to exists equally long as the universe, then it can only be the universe itself.
This definition strives to include everything that exists, except the whole of the universe itself. If you will, the universe is the box (or the chessboard
) and things that exist are in the box. Existence is defined in terms of the box, so including the box itself in the definition seems to me a bit problematic, because if you say "the universe exists" someone could say "exists in what? exists where?". Well, there is no answer to that. And I consider those questions axiomatic to existence.
I think this covers everything we can ever consider to exist. What do you think?
Here's my proposition.
A - The universe is defined as everything that exists.
A1 - Therefore, the universe is the domain in which existence is possible.
A2 - Equally, existence amounts to finding a subset of the universe.
That is, find a cluster of particles in the universe, give them a name X and then you may say "X exists".
Furthermore, I propose:
B - In order for something to exist, it must exist in a specific location.
This follows from A2, since some piece of mass in the universe has a specific location.
C - In order for something to exist, its size must be finite.
This follows partly from B, location can only have meaning if the size is not infinite.
C1 - In particular, it means that if something were to exists of infinite size, it would consist of all the particles of the universe itself and it would automatically be the universe.
C2 - In consequence, something that exists cannot be defined in terms of the size of the universe (eg. half the size of the universe), because infinity/2 = infinity.
D - In order for something to exist, it must exists in a specific finite time interval, shorter than the time of the universe.
This is analogous to C. If something were to exists equally long as the universe, then it can only be the universe itself.
This definition strives to include everything that exists, except the whole of the universe itself. If you will, the universe is the box (or the chessboard
) and things that exist are in the box. Existence is defined in terms of the box, so including the box itself in the definition seems to me a bit problematic, because if you say "the universe exists" someone could say "exists in what? exists where?". Well, there is no answer to that. And I consider those questions axiomatic to existence.I think this covers everything we can ever consider to exist. What do you think?
Buy on AliExpress.com
:strong:
