Stenger\'s Cosmology refuted (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, March 24, 2014, 00:56 (4494 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George:Perhaps we need a change of terminology. > I maintain, with Stenger, that the initial state of the universe > at time zero, was "a state of zero energy", as romansh has suggested. > Whether "a state of zero energy" is "nothing" > or whether "nothing" is "a state of zero energy" may be debated. > > If you then start to ask what was "before" this initial state, > you are implying that time existed before the initial state, > but that means the initial state was not the initial state, > so you are talking self-contradictory nonsense. > This all seems perfectly logical to me.-See my reply to Romansh. Something has also existed. Even if you call it 'a state of zero energy' it is something, not a true nothing