Stenger\'s Cosmology refuted (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, March 24, 2014, 00:56 (3898 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