Why do physicists believe that everything needs to have a reason?

disabled guy

unread,

Nov 27, 2011, 9:22:10 PM11/27/11

to

Why do physicists believe that everything needs to have cause?

If everything really has a cause or a why to it, then all we get is an
infinite regress of causes and that is obviously paradoxical.

Why can't we accept that there is no explanation for why some things
are what they are.

Sam Wormley

unread,

Nov 27, 2011, 9:37:54 PM11/27/11

to

On 11/27/11 8:22 PM, disabled guy wrote:
> If everything really has a cause or a why to it, then all we get is an
> infinite regress of causes and that is obviously paradoxical.

Why do you say paradoxical?

disabled guy

unread,

Nov 27, 2011, 9:44:09 PM11/27/11

to

On Nov 28, 4:37 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com>

> Why do you say paradoxical?

Paradoxical was perhaps the wrong choice of a word. What I mean to say
is that it is illogical or that it goes against common sense or
intuition.

Sam Wormley

unread,

Nov 27, 2011, 10:19:18 PM11/27/11

to

Most relativity and quantum behavior goes against common sense,
which is why many uneducated in science have difficulty understanding
the theories and their applications.

alie...@gmail.com

unread,

Nov 27, 2011, 11:50:31 PM11/27/11

to

On Nov 27, 6:22 pm, disabled guy <shadowsfal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why do physicists believe that everything needs to have cause?

Without cause and effect there's no predictability to the world.
Without predictability there's no physics. Or any other science for
that matter.

> If everything really has a cause or a why to it, then all we get is an
> infinite regress of causes and that is obviously paradoxical.

No, we get a chain of causes that help us understand how the world
works.

> Why can't we accept that there is no explanation for why some things
> are what they are.

Name such a thing, please.

Do you want to live in an incomprehensible world?

Mark L. Fergerson

Yousuf Khan

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 2:18:44 AM11/28/11

to

Actually if anything, not having a reason for something is what goes
against common sense and is paradoxical. It's accepting that some things
have no reasons is paradoxical.

Yousuf Khan

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 2:37:58 AM11/28/11

to

When I hear the word "paradox" I think "faulty premise".

The "Paradox" of "The Twin Paradox", for example, is just
a failure to take the twin's acceleration into account.
Special Relativity requires non·accelerating frames of reference.

What caused the Big Bang ? nothing, it's just our horizon.
No matter if the cause is known/knowable or not, still, it exists.

Likely, cosmic inflation is eternal.  The cosmos expands (exponentially)
because, over giga·years, it thins out ( dissipates ) as exergy is lost.

CWatters

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 5:01:08 AM11/28/11

to

Because we are human.

Has anyone ever proved that some things are unexplainable? Obviously
it's impracticable to explain some things but that's not the same.

Richard Tobin

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 6:29:29 AM11/28/11

to

In article <06ad5f1c-c483-4095...@s4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,

disabled guy <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Why do physicists believe that everything needs to have cause?

Observation. In all cases where we can examine the situation carefully,
we find cause and effect. We therefore conjecture that this is always
true. Of course, it might turn out to be wrong.

>Why can't we accept that there is no explanation for why some things
>are what they are.

We could have done that a few thousand years ago, when we didn't know
why apples fall from trees or why spring follows winter.

Assuming that everything has a cause has been very productive.

-- Richard

Y.Porat

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 8:11:27 AM11/28/11

to

----------------
exactly !!

nature is 100 percent deterministic!!
it is only current science that is not
knowledgeable enough !!!

th e Copenhagen concepts forinstance
ddint do too good for advance in science
they tolerated too much lack of accurate knowledge
and was letting in too much mathematicians (that have not the 'physics
touch '''')
to take over modern physics

i agree that while there is not enough knowledge --
the probability system is the
best of the add hock possible
yet
it had to be kept in mind that
such a situation should be only temporary situation until more
detailed situation will replace it !!!

ATB
Y.Porat
--------------------

Sam Wormley

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 9:57:44 AM11/28/11

to

As in vacuum energy? As in electron tunneling?

maxwell

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 12:14:33 PM11/28/11

to

On Nov 27, 6:22 pm, disabled guy <shadowsfal...@gmail.com> wrote:

The idea of causality is a great simplification. It is the
extrapolation back to nature of the idea that your intent caused your
action. In reality, nature is very complicated, so linear minds need
all the help they can get.

PD

unread,

Nov 28, 2011, 1:55:31 PM11/28/11

to

Common sense and intuition are notoriously poor guides for understanding
the way the universe works, disabled guy.

As for why we always dig for a deeper explanation, I would say that it
is human nature to do so, though obviously some people are more
motivated than others.

If you are the type that says, "If science tells me to abandon my common
sense, then I want no part of it," or, "Why can't we just stop all this
investigation and be happy with the state of our present knowledge?"
then I'm afraid science just isn't going to be a very fun hobby for you,
let alone a career. But you should recognize that not everyone would (or
should) share that sensibility.