The Limits of Post-Existent Theories and the Metaphysical Question of Existence

The Limits of Post-Existent Theories and the Metaphysical Question of Existence

By William Collins | October 2024 | devine-physics.williamwcollins.com

Abstract:

This essay explores the philosophical and scientific challenges in addressing the fundamental question of existence. While post-existent phenomena like quantum fluctuations, multiverse theories, and cosmological models provide insights into how our universe functions after its inception, they fall short in explaining the origin of existence itself. Moreover, these scientific hypotheses often face the same metaphysical issues debated by philosophers for millennia, particularly the concept of infinite regress and the uncaused cause. Through a discussion of post-existent models and metaphysical frameworks, this essay attempts to clarify the limitations of these approaches in providing a comprehensive explanation for existence.

---

Introduction: The Big Questions of Existence

Humanity has long been fascinated by the question: Why is there something rather than nothing? Throughout history, philosophers, theologians, and scientists have grappled with this ultimate inquiry. The scientific revolution brought empirical tools that allowed us to study the universe with greater precision. However, when it comes to the question of origins—what existed before the universe, and what caused it—science has its limitations.

The difficulty in addressing these questions stems from the fact that scientific theories, such as those concerning quantum fluctuations or multiverse theories, only apply within the realm of post-existence. These models, although impressive in their scope, often attempt to superimpose known physical laws onto the unknown territory of preexistence, leading to logical dilemmas like infinite regress. To understand these complexities, we must delve into both the scientific and metaphysical dimensions of the problem.

---

Post-Existent Theories: Attempting to Explain Creation

A variety of scientific hypotheses have emerged over the years to explain the nature of the universe, its structure, and its origins. However, these models all rely on post-existent phenomena—observable aspects of the universe after it already came into being—and thus struggle to explain the act of creation itself. Below are some prominent theories that face these challenges:

1. Quantum Fluctuations: A leading hypothesis that attempts to explain how something could arise from nothing. However, quantum fluctuations presuppose the existence of a quantum vacuum, an entity within the post-Big Bang universe, which cannot logically explain the creation of space, time, and energy.

2. Multiverse Hypothesis: The idea that our universe is one of many, potentially infinite, universes. Yet, like quantum fluctuations, this model assumes an overarching structure in which these universes exist, without addressing where that structure came from.

3. Inflationary Cosmology: This theory explains the rapid expansion of the universe after the Big Bang but doesn’t explain the cause of the universe itself.

4. Big Bounce Theory: Proposes that the universe goes through cycles of expansion and contraction. This cyclical model still faces the problem of infinite regress, as it does not account for a "first" universe.

5. Quantum Gravity and Loop Quantum Gravity: These approaches attempt to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity but are still bound by the limitations of post-existent space and time.

6. String Theory and Brane Cosmology: Both suggest additional dimensions and fundamental particles as building blocks of the universe, yet they do not escape the same ontological problems. The strings or branes must exist in some form, raising the question: where did they come from?

7. Hawking-Hartle No-Boundary Proposal: A model proposing that the universe has no temporal boundary, i.e., no beginning. However, this, too, is a form of infinite regress—there’s no explanation for why such a universe exists.

8. Emergent Universe Models: Suggest that the universe may have always existed in a stable state and only began expanding recently. Again, this doesn’t provide an ultimate cause for existence.

9. Zero-Energy Universe Hypothesis: Argues that the total energy of the universe is zero, and thus it could have come from "nothing." However, this nothing is actually a quantum vacuum, a post-existent structure.

10. Simulated Universe Hypothesis: Posits that we might be living in a computer simulation. While fascinating, this theory only pushes the question back: who or what created the simulation?

---

The Metaphysical Challenge: Infinite Regress and the Uncaused Cause

Philosophers like Aristotle, Aquinas, and Leibniz have long debated the problem of infinite regress. An infinite regress occurs when every cause must itself have a cause, leading to an endless chain of causality that never arrives at a first cause. This presents a fundamental issue when discussing the origins of existence.

Thomas Aquinas, for example, argued that there must be a "first cause," an uncaused cause, which itself does not require a creator. For Aquinas, this first cause is God. He presented this argument in his Five Ways as part of a larger metaphysical framework aimed at explaining not only the universe but also morality, consciousness, and human purpose.

Quantum and Scientific Anthropomorphism

The problem with relying on post-existent scientific models, such as quantum fluctuations, to explain the origin of existence is that they involve what could be called "scientific anthropomorphism." Just as anthropomorphism attributes human characteristics to non-human entities, scientific anthropomorphism applies post-existent principles like quantum mechanics to pre-existent conditions—where neither time, space, nor physical laws as we know them would exist.

This is an overextension of scientific models into metaphysical realms where they do not belong. Even quantum particles in a quantum vacuum are part of the observable universe and cannot logically be used to explain the origin of that universe.

The Role of Metaphysics: Bridging Science and Philosophy

While science excels at explaining the natural world, it falls short when addressing questions of why the universe exists in the first place. This is where metaphysics plays a crucial role. Metaphysical inquiry goes beyond empirical data to consider the deeper, more fundamental questions about existence itself, including the possibility of a creator or an uncaused cause.

The challenge, as philosophers like Aquinas and Leibniz have shown, is that without a first cause, we are left with the dilemma of infinite regress. Atheistic naturalism tries to circumvent this problem by invoking self-contained, eternal universes or multiverse models, but these explanations remain speculative and leave the fundamental question unanswered: Why does anything exist at all?

---

The Role of Faith and Choice

At the heart of the debate about existence lies a crucial decision: whether to place one's faith in a metaphysical framework that posits a creator or to adhere to a naturalistic explanation based on the observable universe. Both positions require faith because neither can be definitively proven through empirical means. Those who choose theism often do so based on a combination of philosophical reasoning, historical evidence, and personal experiences, while naturalists often base their beliefs on science's ability to explain post-existent phenomena.

In either case, the choice one makes has profound implications—not only for how one views the universe but also for how one understands human consciousness, morality, and the potential for an afterlife.

---

Conclusion: The Limits of Post-Existent Phenomena in Explaining Preexistence

In conclusion, the scientific models that attempt to explain the origin of the universe are bound by the limitations of post-existence. They apply known physical laws to unknown conditions, leading to logical inconsistencies like infinite regress and the uncaused cause dilemma. While these models, such as quantum fluctuations, multiverse theory, and the Big Bounce, provide fascinating insights into the behavior of the universe, they cannot offer a complete answer to the question of why anything exists at all.

The metaphysical questions posed by philosophers like Aquinas remain as relevant today as they were centuries ago. The concept of an uncaused cause—a necessary being—is a compelling explanation for the existence of the universe, especially when science reaches its limits in explaining preexistence. Ultimately, the decision to believe in a creator or to adhere to naturalism is a matter of faith, and the stakes of this decision, especially in light of potential eternal consequences, cannot be understated.

---

William Collins

October 2024

devine-physics.williamwcollins.com

---

Hashtags

#Philosophy #Metaphysics #Existence #QuantumPhysics #BigBang #Creation #Naturalism #Aquinas #UncausedCause #InfiniteRegress #Multiverse #QuantumFluctuations #StringTheory #Cosmology #FineTuning #Theism #Atheism #GodHypothesis #IrreducibleComplexity #FaithAndReason #Consciousness #NDEs #Spirituality #UniverseOrigin #BigBounce #ScienceVsPhilosophy #SimulatedUniverse #ScientificAnthropomorphism #Hawking #StephenHawking #ProbabilisticArgument #PostBigBangScience #EmpiricalLimits #QuantumTunneling #GodInTheGaps #CosmicMystery

SEO Title:

"The Limits of Science: Why Post-Existent Theories Cannot Explain the Origin of the Universe"

SEO Description:

"Explore the limits of scientific theories like quantum fluctuations and multiverse models in explaining the universe's origins. Dive into the metaphysical debate and the enduring question of the uncaused cause."