on Existence

Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.
Hawking, Mlodinow, "The Grand Design"

If M-theory (the most general supersymmetric theory of gravity) is "true" then there can't be nothing. To put it another way, nothing is too unstable to stand for very long.


Re: What about a world of Platonic forms? Are abstractions something or are they nothing? What about a world of only numbers? A two dimensional universe? Space-time and gravity/matter aren't necessary two dimensionally.

There is the two-time physics of Itzhac Bars:

For systems that are not yet understood or even constructed, such as M-theory, 2T-physics points to a possible approach for a more symmetric and more revealing formulation in 11+2 dimensions that can lead to deeper insights, including a better understanding of space and time. The 2T approach could be one of the possible avenues to construct the most symmetric version of the fundamental theory.
<physics1.usc.edu/~bars/research.html>

And maybe in some of the 10^500 universes of M-theory, some of the spacial dimensions are unwound (or wound), as 7 are in ours.

And then there is MEH, of course (Mathematical Ensemble Hypothesis, aka Mathematical Universe Hypothesis <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_universe_hypothesis>).


Re: fictional construction

The way I think of fictional entities (perhaps it is a form of eliminativism): They are things that only exist in the form of cultural artifacts (ink on paper, bits in digital files) and in brains in the form of neural activity.

The same is true of numbers and sets in mathematics.



comments on Is Existence Necessary? (Philosophers' Playground)