On Nothing in a void.

Has anyone peeked between FF ears?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Now that is a perfect example of thinking there is nothing but really there is something but I suspect just as one does not wish to invoke complex science to describe what would be seen as empty space you in this case do not want to take the time to describe in detail what we may find or use profanity to describe what it is you finally discover.
Alex

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Correct

The Irish are to blame

Or to be a bit more accurate I am to blame because a Irish joke was taken as ..............(insert what passes for "correctivness" here)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Runs from the pitchfork carrying crowd

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We have a bit of trouble with the concept of nothing. We might be able to think of a space with nothing in it, a volume of 'vacuum'. But then if this nothing is bounded, it's a finite volume of nothing.
Well of course, you can say, "The finite volume is a space with nothing in it". But does that mean the existence of nothing has been proven? There it is, some nothing in a finite volume.
What if the volume was infinite, does that solve the volume problem? Would that lead to a paradox--an infinity of nothing?

 

It's you who is using the word "nothing" as if it could be used to refer to something... And that's just not appropriate.

Basically, you're saying that nothing is somehow something but that somehow it doesn't exist!

The proposition "nothing exists" is generally understood as perfectly meaningful but claiming it is seen as absurd because it can only be false. If someone claimed suddenly "Nothing exists!", people would think he is a madman or he is joking. It would be an absurdity because you certainly need to exist to utter anything so it couldn't possibly be true that nothing exists if you are uttering "Nothing exist". All things obvious, I guess...

So, the "nothing exists" that you use in your conditional would normally be understood as obviously false. Yet, it's not possible to take your sentence in this sense. Your sentence only makes sense if we interpret the word "nothing" as possibly referring to something. But that's not possible. The word "nothing" is not used to refer to anything.

You are in fact using the word "nothing" here in the same way as we normally all use the "God", i.e. as if it meant "something". It's easy to check because you can replace the word "nothing" by the word "God" in your conditional: If God exists please show me where it is... In the case of the word "God", however, we know the word is used to mean some specific thing because we can disagree as to whether this thing exists or not. We cannot sensibly disagree as to the existence of something that would somehow be nothing.

So, the way you do it here is not normally the way we use the word "nothing". The word "nothing" isn't at all like the word "God". We cannot sensibly disagree about the existence of nothing.

So, the way you use the word "nothing" is just non-standard, which makes it impossible to have a coherent discussion.

That's obviously not true.

Beside, you just badly contradicted yourself, saying first that nothing is somehow something that doesn't exist and then that it is something that does exist. You're just not making sense.

Which makes it impossible to have any coherent discussion.
EB

 

Really please stop with the pedantic mangling of the English language

The concept of a area (3 dimensional space) containing ABSOLUTELY NO physical items / stuff / radiation etc etc etc is easy to comprehend

My 3 neurones brain, Huey Dewey and Louie agree, a concept of ABSOLUTELY NO physical items / stuff / radiation etc etc etc is NOTHING

The fact that NOTHING (as in a concept of ABSOLUTELY NO physical items / stuff / radiation etc etc etc is NOTHING) has a name NOTHING purely means that it has a NAME

Since the NAME resides OUTSIDE of the NOTHING - the NOTHING retains its purity ie it remains NOTHING

Nothing could be clearer

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

No. "0" is the symbol. It's the symbol for a number. The number 0. We normally talk of the value of things that are not numbers, since a number precisely is the value of some other thing, for example the value of the result of an operation, or the value of the temperature.

So "0" certainly stands for something, which may or may not be just the concept of a number, but it's something.

And the value 0 is not nothing. It's a value, like all other values.

That doesn't seem like an argument. Are you just pleading we accept your point?

Clearly, we can represent God and not everybody will accept that God exists.

"Zero" has a relation with "nothing", yes. We can say for example that there is zero things in this box, which would mean the same as saying that there is nothing in it.

There's another word that has a relation with "nothing", and that's the word "hole". Surprising no one has mentioned that... There's a hole missing.

And "disappear". There was a dog in the box. The dog disappeared and nothing was left in the box.
EB

 

???

The concept of an area...

Clearly, we won't be using the same English language.

Indeed.
EB

 

Well perhaps my expression is lacking so let me ask you this...is there any place in the universe where we dont find something.

It is my view that even in empty space there will be something...photons or fields ...I can not think of any place where something can not be found.
I think about this often and the longer I think about it the more things I think you could reasonably expect to be present...in fact I start to wonder how everything can fit...

As to the rest of your post I found it most thoughtful and well put together but I would appreciate your opinion on the specific proposition I just now presented.

Thank you for your contribution.
Alex

 

You are unnecessarily dismissive and if you are determined to follow such a course so be it...but I suggest continuing this discussion or any other is far from impossible.

Heck if our discussion was seeking to avoid a war would you throw your hands up this way an walk out proclaiming communication is impossible.
Alex

 

Do you think the name is a clue?

No mention of chess board but my radar getting some odd pings

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

A name given by its owner reveals something rather than nothing☺ and perhaps more than the name would first suggest.
I like my name and you like yours and so we use them proudly reflecting a humble confidence in our honesty to be who we are, but we are fortunate to have a wonderful country under our feet and are unable to approach the ordinary with unnecessary sophistication or maybe something else goes on all together.

Yes but I play like a goat who knocks over the pieces, eats the board says bah and avoids the niceties of recognising any rules have been broken...so I am no fun to play.

My search for nothing may find the non existant eather even if we must call something nothing ... as I said when you think about it there is no place in the universe where we will not find something...there is something where ever we look and I just think that is very hard to get your head (meaning my head) around.

I think of a point way out there somewhere in space and presume the tradjectories that pass thru it must be infinite ( I think geometry allows such an assumption) and along each tradjectory does travell something and it is reasonable to presume that each tradjectory sees many many somethings rushing along most at C ...so think of a point and then how many photons (to keep it simple) that travel thru any point..any point anywhere...its really is extrodinary if you think about it..if you think about it...
And so I wonder why we even have a word " nothing" as it does not exist. It describes a situation that can not exist...when you think about it.

Here is another saying I like...
The mind should not be used as a warehouse but rather as a manufacturing plant...most folk are happy to fill their ware houses but avoid going into manufacturing.

Alex

 

I wouldn't know and I doubt anybody would but I'm sure we would find at least the space and the time to put something, and that's obviously not nothing.

Also, this question is very different from your OP. Your OP is entirely about nothing as if nothing was something. This isn't a meaningful question. If you're question is about nothing then it's just not an actual question.

The only legitimate question would be about the word "nothing". Its meaning and use, essentially.

And once you've cleared that rock you can start to use the word "nothing" to ask meaningful questions. But still not the one in your OP. It's just incoherent.

Sounds like an entirely empirical matter. You should start a thread on this in the Physics forum, see how it goes there.

Still, you might want to rephrase. If a space is "empty", then there won't be "something" in it, unless you really want to keep having meaningless conversations.

Well, I don't have any. All I could say is that if two things are touching, then there's nothing in between. Or, that there's nothing in empty space.

And I fail to see why that should be a problem. I guess it would be for you to make your case if you have one. Or may be you have a case but there's nothing in it?
EB

 

Like it. Liked even better Charles Schulz Peanuts and Lucy

To paraphrase "Life is one big supermarket where you can go through the isles and help yourself from the millions of choices. Be sure when you get to checkout you are not in the 8 items or less line"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Especially when you consider that even empty space is a thing then there is no place/space left to look for nothing. Where and how did space come into existence? the problem seems to be space itself is something and that it just exists everywhere. But even everywhere must still be somewhere that came from nowhere...

 

Well lets deal with the question as illegitimate.
Look I am not really interested is your approach although it is very nice and shows you are no fool.
And rather than get into one of the usual discussions determined to examine meaning and presentatuon I will leave it to you to try and understand what I am talking about and join me in wondering about just how there is something everywhere.
You may indulge in that wondering and weave a picture in reality or pull at the threads and continue to try and not make sence of my clumsy expression using your reasonably limited deterministic reliance on where you think I have tripped up.
If that gives you satisfaction I say I am happy that you find satisfaction on focusing on what I unfortunately consider trivial matters.

Come on now think of the preventing a war or copping out because of your horror of the misuse or otherwise of language and expression.
If you are trying to demonstrate a fine education consider it done.

So you would send me to my death as well I suppose.
It is hardley a matter for any science section really and in any event my proposition need not be dismissed because it does not neatly fit a scientific description.
How difficult is it to consider the proposition I outline..Well of course it is not difficult in the least if one decided to consider the interesting proposition I present.

Thank you for your helpful suggestion but no I really dont want to rephrase anything.
Its simple really..we say space is empty and by so saying imply it is empty or contains nothing and U simply say well even though we call it empty or call it nothing it is really not that way for upon reasonable consideration we can only find to use a description of nothing or empty does not describe the matter correctly.

Yes let us leave it there. .. I am happy as I am confident the proposition I point to can be understood and it matters not if it goes past there.

Thank you for presenting an interesting reply.
Alex

 

Not a problem space just is☺
Alex

 

The expression "empty space" has been a vacuous cliché for a long time now. Maybe people between Newton and Faraday thought of space as most often empty but even then people should have been aware that space somehow had to contain light, which is obviously not nothing. People nowadays also wonder about quantum fluctuations everywhere, including in so-called "empty" space. So, I'm not sure what kind of people you are referring to but I would assume that most people nowadays can inform themselves and learn that space isn't really empty, even deep space far away from any galaxy.

So, yes, there's always something anywhere in space.

Unless, that is, there's a region of space, or a kind of space, that would be different from what scientists believe there is. Which, speculatively, seems always a possibility.

If your real question is as to whether perfectly empty space is at all a physical possibility, you should really ask it in the Physics Forum.

Unless you're counting on some lone wandering star from there to just go through your thread by shear happenstance. But then your thread title wasn't helpful for that to happen.
EB

 

Yes indeed.
Alex

 

One could approach the question from a perspective that "nothing" is a metaphyisical condition of being "permittive" of everything.