# A Universe from Nothing: Not that hard to understand.

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by paddoboy, Feb 3, 2017.

1. ### riverValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,847
Nothing is the complete opposite of something ;

Something has depth , breadth , length and movement

Nothing has no potential .

Write4U likes this.

3. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,922
That is not a definition.

5. ### riverValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,847
It is , review my post # 261

Messages:
12,016
^^^
Linguers.

<>

8. ### riverValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,847
No

You should look for the answer in simplicity and complexity .

9. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
The studiers of languistics....

10. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
Not really, in linguistics you should look for the rare words, which ascribe authorship.
Strangely the NSA has made a science of this.

11. ### riverValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,847
An example ...

12. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
In furtherance of our discussion of temperature in the thread; Can you completely destroy a Dimension, I hope this might be the more appropriate forum.

Something just occurred to me.
If I may pose a question first to offer the background for my following posit.
Is it possible that -1 K can exist, or is 0 K the absolute absence of temperature? If 0 K is in fact absolute zero temperature., then should it not follow that the temperature scale begins at 0 K.?

If that is the case then all other measurements must be relative degrees of warmth. +1 K is warmer than 0 k and every measurement above that are in reality degrees of warmth relative to absolute zero K, regardless whether we call it -19 C or -20 F (both below freezing point), these measurements will always be warmer than 0 K.

Came to mind, in a state (condition) of infinitely large and infinitely small nothingness, what would be its temperature. If o K is the absolute absence of any temperature (warmth), can we say that at least one property of nothingness is 0 K. (the absence of any temperature)?

I'll stop here to see if I am failing to understand the concept of nothingness.

13. ### riverValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,847
Nothingness has no temperature .

14. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
Right, zero degrees Kelvin.

15. ### riverValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,847
No , hydrogen becomes a liquid .

16. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
Remember this is the condition before hydrogen even exists
Can there be -1 K ?

17. ### riverValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,847
How so ?

Now we are getting to the manifestation of matter .

Not energy .

18. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,922
Temperature is a measurement of the bulk movement of particles.
No matter = no particles = no temperature.

19. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
Thus my question, if there is an infinitely large and infinitely small state or condition of absence of matter and movement do we have condition of absolute zero temperature?

I am taking the viewpoint that nothingness still represent a permittive condition.

20. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
Lexical statistics. See below @ 45:20 . If you haven't seen it yet, the whole lecture begins @ 25:10.

It's really an excellent view of how life on an earth-like planet can start.

Last edited: Aug 10, 2017

Messages:
29
I don't believe so, as @ Abs zero entropy is a steady state. I don't think it [entropy] can go below that.

Write4U likes this.
22. ### exchemistValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,916
Not really. I more or less agree with Dave, save that any black body radiation present can be taken to be equivalent to matter at a defined temperature. In your scenario you have an absence of energy, but that isn't really the same as an absolute zero temperature.

23. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,320
How do we ever get to zero temperature if there is thermodynamic energy. Only total motionless.
Kind of like what came first...? I submit they both gained physical existence at exactly the same hierarchy level of self-ordering functions. Which is the concept of zero itself. The beginning of a thing which mathematically may become expressed in reality. Latent potentials, inherent in the fabric of spacetime itself, which began during the FTL expansion epoch, t = 0, before the start, of the universe, then there was t1,t2,t3,t4......to present .

IMO, its highly probabilistic, after all here we are....

But What was at Zero time, temperature ? No, we had zero temperature, no value.

But because we invented ways to use this universal constant for our convenience, IF we make a relative assumption of zero being equal to thirty two, is, as has been defined, the arbitrary use of zero as a point of departure or event. Webster put it in sixth place (.6) as a general statement that you are permitted to give zero a valueless demarcation point for practical purposes.

Zero has no value, but it can Give you the power to use it for measurement purposes, but only because you use it in context as the baseline of a new set by the very definition of Zero Value.
We use it in count-downs or count-ups or starting time or end-time (time's up). It is in a Cardinal Value of nothingness that is "useful" as a variable demarcation point for specific applications, precisely because it represents the neutral (valueless state) before the event. It's handy dandy!.......