I'm not trying to be enlightening or anything, but it's obvious that life contains a system; existence, non-existence, and superposition(having qualities of both).

The thing is non-existence is apart of both superposition and existence, existence apart of both superposition and non-existence, and superposition having qualities of both existence and non-existence.

Basically nothing is something, something apart of everything; you've heard it before.

My question is than what is the opposite of this system? Where is the true definition of what we think non-existence means? It's heard to ask a question about something literally undescribable with human words.

What is the anti-system?

Haha, I'm not trying to be enlightening or anything, I honestly am all ears to those who can decipher my horrible description. Please, don't hold the fact that I rarely post on here, against me. I love reading what you guys have to say.

Like for instance, They say, that the universe started with one atom, but without that one atom; what do you have? Empty space? How is that possible? Just an empty vacuum?

You might be thinking to youself, "Well, yeah, what's so heard to understand?" Well, think of the boundaries of the empty space. Think of where the empty space itself came from. That vacuum. Please enlighten(I loves that word) me!

I'm not trying to be enlightening or anything . . .

Please enlighten(I loves that word) me!

Sorry . . . I just had to point out that blunt contradiction . . . :p

I've never heard of this "superposition" before. Care to tell me where ya heard it?

The universe didn't start with one atom . . . I don't think. I'm working with what I know of the Big Bang theory, so forgive me if anything is wrong . . .

All the matter that is in the universe was super-compressed into an infinitely small singularity. In this singularity, no laws of physics existed. Then for some reason, it started to expand super-fast. Then components began assembling. First, they made protons, neutrons, and electrons. Then they made nuclei. Then they made atoms.

I'm sorry I can't contribute more to this thread, but I'm tired.

Superposition???
Nope.
Existence is an exclusive 'quality' (if you choose to look at it like that). I believe you're referring to the idea of superposition from quantum mechanics. If that's the case, then it has nothing to do with what you're talking about. The 'quantum' superposition is merely a model to assist with understanding the nature of wave collapse (cf.: observer effect, uncertainty principle). In any case, our 'system' is merealy one of energy dispersion. That's about as accurate a description as you can get (as long as you stick to a scientific model).

Superposition???
Nope.
Existence is an exclusive 'quality' (if you choose to look at it like that). I believe you're referring to the idea of superposition from quantum mechanics. If that's the case, then it has nothing to do with what you're talking about. The 'quantum' superposition is merely a model to assist with understanding the nature of wave collapse (cf.: observer effect, uncertainty principle). In any case, our 'system' is merealy one of energy dispersion. That's about as accurate a description as you can get (as long as you stick to a scientific model).

Wave collapse...observer effect...uncertainty principle? Please, explain.

This probably doesn't have anything to do with what is in here but glaucon inspired a question from me....

Would it be generally correct (in a simplistic way) then to say that everything that is...is energy?

This probably doesn't have anything to do with what is in here but glaucon inspired a question from me....

Would it be generally correct (in a simplistic way) then to say that everything that is...is energy?

From a contemporary physics point of view? Yes indeed.

Wave collapse...observer effect...uncertainty principle? Please, explain.

OK. I'm no expert here.. but.. here goes...

Wave collapse refers to the idea that all things are naturally in an indeterminate quantum state, sometimes called an Eigenstate. Understood as a wave function of probability, the thing (whatever it may be) has no particular form
until it is observed in some way, which thereby collapses the probability wave into a fixed outcome. The classic example is of the temperature of water running from a tap. Is it hot or cold? The quantum point of view states that it is always neither and both... until one places a finger in it say, and then, that activity 'makes' it one or the other. Wave (http://www.physics.uiowa.edu/~umallik/adventure/quantumwave.html)


This of couse also involves the concept of 'observer effect'. The 'observer effect' is the idea that interfering with a natural thing affects it. Check this out: Observer (http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/science/observer_effect.htm)


In a way, this arose from the formulation of the Uncertainty Principle which states that it is impossible to know both the position and momentum of something at the same time. Check this: Heisenburg (http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/208/jan27/hup.html)

All of this stuff is a result of early work done in quantum mechanics. Most of the notably 'weird' stuff can be attributed to Erwin Schrodinger. Check this out:

Erwin (http://www.mtnmath.com/faq/meas-qm-3.html)

Theres also a book called Schrodinger's cat that pretty much covers all this.

Whew.
:-)

OK. I'm no expert here.. but.. here goes...

Wave collapse refers to the idea that all things are naturally in an indeterminate quantum state, sometimes called an Eigenstate. Understood as a wave function of probability, the thing (whatever it may be) has no particular form
until it is observed in some way, which thereby collapses the probability wave into a fixed outcome. The classic example is of the temperature of water running from a tap. Is it hot or cold? The quantum point of view states that it is always neither and both... until one places a finger in it say, and then, that activity 'makes' it one or the other. Wave (http://www.physics.uiowa.edu/~umallik/adventure/quantumwave.html)


This of couse also involves the concept of 'observer effect'. The 'observer effect' is the idea that interfering with a natural thing affects it. Check this out: Observer (http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/science/observer_effect.htm)


In a way, this arose from the formulation of the Uncertainty Principle which states that it is impossible to know both the position and momentum of something at the same time. Check this: Heisenburg (http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/208/jan27/hup.html)

All of this stuff is a result of early work done in quantum mechanics. Most of the notably 'weird' stuff can be attributed to Erwin Schrodinger. Check this out:

Erwin (http://www.mtnmath.com/faq/meas-qm-3.html)

Theres also a book called Schrodinger's cat that pretty much covers all this.

Whew.
:-)

Aye, Aye. Doesn't that have to do alot with the many-worlds interpretation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everett_many-worlds_interpretation

first of all he didnt contradict himself in the initial question, he said he was not trying to enlighten but instead wanted to be enlightened. there is a difference.

What would be the opposite....well...The system as you have put it includes both sides of the spectrum...both life and death ect ect. The opposite of our system would have to be another system that would contrast this system. Its hard to explain but is really a simple idea. Im not sure wehter or not another system to contrast this one exists but it is possible. Just to let you know it is my own theory that you will never be able to find one side of the spectrum without its other side present as well. This allows for the "whole" portion to exist. there cannot be only a dark or light a positive or negative there always has to be both. This is why every action has an equal or opposite reaction. I will have to think about this question more and try and find a sufficient answer or insight to it. right now im just kinda rambleing which i tend to do. :p

Hope what i have said has given you some insight

L8rs