About nothing

[StarMountainKid]

Leonardo da Vinci quote: "Among the great things that are found among us, the being of nothingness is the greatest."

[Frank Merton]

I think a couple of threads, one the scientific ideas about nothingness and another the philosophical problem, works.

[CrimsonKing]

The real idea of nothing does not exist,neither does the idea of everything.Only what we can comprehend do we understand.

[Frank Merton]

How about this formulation: If nothing existed, there would be nothing.

[Space Commander Travis]

Oh interesting thread. I made one just like it today in the Science section lol. Forgive me, I did a search on "nothing" but nothing turned up.

So does that mean that nothing turned up, as in there was no thing that turned up, or something did turn up, but that something that turned up was nothing?

[CrimsonKing]

So does that mean that nothing turned up, as in there was no thing that turned up, or something did turn up, but that something that turned up was nothing?

Confusing conversation

[FlyingAngel]

For the duality theory to be valid, "nothing" has to exist for a "thing" to exist. Otherwise there would be no reference of "thing".

[Space Commander Travis]

For the duality theory to be valid, "nothing" has to exist for a "thing" to exist. Otherwise there would be no reference of "thing".

I suppose it's rather like good and Evil.

[lightly]

.. or light and dark? Trouble is.. there is no dark. Just as there is no nothing.

[Potassium]

Depends on what you'd classify as 'nothing'.

In quantum physics we denote absolute vacuum as nothing.

Though vacuum contains no matter and energy, transitions between nothing and something, i.e. the amount of energy required to transform potential/probable existence into actual existence, does exist. The reason the given space would appear as nothing to us is due to the freakishly small scale of fluctuations/transitions and of course due to the fact they could cancel each other out (just like destructive wave interference). So is 'nothing' really nothing? Beats me.

Personally, I accept a concept of the absence of consciousness as complete nothingness. Meaning, if I died, my main processor, the brain, would cease to exist. My whole perception of reality and even the ability to think would vanish. Nothing.

[StarMountainKid]

-

Personally, I accept a concept of the absence of consciousness as complete nothingness.

Yes, before I was born is a good example of nothing. Also, I had an operation once and under the anesthetic was another nothing. If the universe itself has no consciousness, is this another nothing?

[Frank Merton]

1. One side of me says that nothing is a contradiction in terms and therefore an illogicality that cannot exist.

2. Another side says maybe the problem is with the word "exist." Saying that nothing can or cannot exist is meaningless

3. It also occurs to me that there could never have been a time when there was nothing, since time is something.

4. But that doesn't necessarily imply that time could not have had a beginning; if it did, that would be the beginning of something but "before" the beginning of time is meaningless.

[Potassium]

1. One side of me says that nothing is a contradiction in terms and therefore an illogicality that cannot exist.

2. Another side says maybe the problem is with the word "exist." Saying that nothing can or cannot exist is meaningless

Let's try defining 'nothing'.

If 'nothing' is the absence of anything but 'nothing', it's 'nothing'. So we have a loop here.

If we say that 'nothing' is the opposite of 'anything', then it's the absence of the opposite of anything but 'nothing' (the absence of nothing but nothing). Quite silly.

I think, I see what you meant by contradiction.

[JC2]

Within the philosophical notion of nothing I would suggest that as we hold our universe as the “thing” the end point you might say, then the middle is the “some”, the beginning has to consist of duality/polarity as every “thing” is composed of duality/polarity before the beginning we have nothing and before that nothing and so we enter the infinite, nothing for me represents the infinite?!?

so in trying to answer such a question can I exist within an “infinite” has to then be answered, in that I then have to acknowledge that nothing has to have meaning then is that meaning going to enable me to then understand the question?

Do I “need” it or not?

[FlyingAngel]

Saying that "nothing" can't exist is the same as saying the universe has been always there, conclude that the universe isn't created from nothingness.

Do you ever wonder why any question you ask can lead to the origin of the universe or God?

Edited April 2, 2013 by FlyingAngel

[Frank Merton]

I haven't experienced that; the questions I ask don't lead to God at all. Nothingness seems to me the very antithesis of God anyway. I think we can say that there has always been something, but we don't know that "always" is infinite; in fact it seems logically not possible.

[JC2]

Saying that "nothing" can't exist is the same as saying the universe has been always there, conclude that the universe isn't created from nothingness.

Do you ever wonder why any question you ask can lead to the origin of the universe or God?

The reason why any question you ask always leads to either god or the start of the universe is due to the fact that the moment you ask the first question you start a exponential awakening to every other question. Doesn't matter where you start within the universe everything leads you back to the beginning as you will by design alone always look for the narrative, the common denominator, the reason why.

It then depends on how far your own personal design has already taken you on that quest as to how you answer these questions, any one doing such a journey will ultimately reach the point of understanding perfection but that is a whole new thread.

[lightly]

Depends on what you'd classify as 'nothing'.

In quantum physics we denote absolute vacuum as nothing.

Though vacuum contains no matter and energy, transitions between nothing and something, i.e. the amount of energy required to transform potential/probable existence into actual existence, does exist. The reason the given space would appear as nothing to us is due to the freakishly small scale of fluctuations/transitions and of course due to the fact they could cancel each other out (just like destructive wave interference). So is 'nothing' really nothing? Beats me.

Personally, I accept a concept of the absence of consciousness as complete nothingness. Meaning, if I died, my main processor, the brain, would cease to exist. My whole perception of reality and even the ability to think would vanish. Nothing.

^ ... sounds like the definition of Vacuum needs to be updated? At one time it was thought to contain truly Nothing?

(unless you believe in a GOD) .. the universe formed in the absence of consciousness?

[Frank Merton]

Apres moi, nothing. The clearest possible statement of solipsism.

[manbearpigg]

Although we humans perceive time in a linear fashion, a being of a higher dimension or just sheer largeness in size would perceive our time an an all-encompassing dot. to a larger (possibly higher dimensional) being, the space between one star to another would be NOTHING as it would not be able to grasp all the tiny interactions that happen between that space. Us HUMANS would be NOTHING to it since we could not change, influence, contact, that being in any way that is significant enough.

THUS while using Einstein's theory of everything, we are relatively nothing to that much larger being.

Let us bring it down to our size, where we are the amazingly large creatures to a microscopic society on the molecular levels. Those beings in our reality "does not exist" and is thus NOTHING to us.

mathematically, all things get smaller without disappearing (being nothing), if we put it in terms of lego blocks, the nothing are just tiny clear blocks that no one can see but is necessary for the sustainability of the WHOLE lego building.

IDK just my thoughts.

[Bendy Demon]

The concept of 'nothing' is a purely subjective and relative term. Nature does not and cannot sustain a 'nothing'.

Let's use a simple analogy. You walk into an empty room and would claim there was nothing in it. Well..'nothing' as in there is a lack of relevant objects such as chairs, tables, tv's, cats, etc.

However there is always something in any area. In the vacant room there is air, dust particles, electromagnetic frequencies, temperature variances, dust mites, germs, viruses, chemical traces, walls, ceilings, floors, lights...the list goes on but for the individual the room dos not contain anything that is of interest or use so we say there is 'nothing' in it.

Same with space...our technology has advanced to allow us to detect and measure things and as it grows we will be able to detect and study more things and many of our previous theories, hypothesis, conjectures and extrapolations will be refined as well.

It is seemingly a matter of personal relevance.