>Can there ever be nothing ?If you have something, there can always be a number of questions, Why, How, When, Who, etc,.But maybe there always is something, is nothing an impossibility ?Maybe that is not the biggest question but it's a slightly different question than the more common ones postulated.
>In my opinion the biggest question is "Was there a beginning and if so what was it?" The reason I say this is because everything else hinges on it, even Sean's question about 'nothingness'. It gets straight to the heart of science and philosophy by questioning existence, and leads to all other questions about existence such as when, where, how, why etc.
>Agreed, "was there a beginning" does supercede all other questions, except of course the metaphysical one of "what is real", or the empistemological one of "what can we know".But for science, yes definitely, was there a beginning ?For my own believe i think that there was not a beginning, definitely not in the manner of a big bang. To think, all the great minds came together and the best explanation they could come up with was "a big bang".
>I agree. I don't believe in a 'beginning' of time. The very idea seems preposterous. How can change (time) appear without something changing (time moving forward) to cause the appearance of change (time)?Although I don't like the question "What can we know?" Of course you could use the answer from that to invalidate the answers to the others. But if not then I would say that all of reality is bigger and all-inclusive, whereas "What can we know?" is merely about humans.
Battison's Blog 
>A few ideas: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225780.068-the-biggest-questions-ever-asked.html
>Can there ever be nothing ?If you have something, there can always be a number of questions, Why, How, When, Who, etc,.But maybe there always is something, is nothing an impossibility ?Maybe that is not the biggest question but it's a slightly different question than the more common ones postulated.
>That's a good one! It'll be up tomorrow.
>In my opinion the biggest question is "Was there a beginning and if so what was it?" The reason I say this is because everything else hinges on it, even Sean's question about 'nothingness'. It gets straight to the heart of science and philosophy by questioning existence, and leads to all other questions about existence such as when, where, how, why etc.
>Agreed, "was there a beginning" does supercede all other questions, except of course the metaphysical one of "what is real", or the empistemological one of "what can we know".But for science, yes definitely, was there a beginning ?For my own believe i think that there was not a beginning, definitely not in the manner of a big bang. To think, all the great minds came together and the best explanation they could come up with was "a big bang".
>I agree. I don't believe in a 'beginning' of time. The very idea seems preposterous. How can change (time) appear without something changing (time moving forward) to cause the appearance of change (time)?Although I don't like the question "What can we know?" Of course you could use the answer from that to invalidate the answers to the others. But if not then I would say that all of reality is bigger and all-inclusive, whereas "What can we know?" is merely about humans.