What is nothing?

[Star]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the meaning of "nothing".

I posit there can only be one true meaning of nothing; it's that which doesn't exist, never existed, can't exist, and never will exist, in any universe or other state of existence, period. It's no thing.

Debate for or against this.

Here's a good debate on nothing. As much as I like Lawrence M. Krauss, I think he confuses people with his sloppy use of the term. By his own admission (insistence even) there are two other definitions of nothing.

[Artie]

The right way to see the Big-Bang is: God spoke - BANG - there it was! The Big Bang!

S. E. Myers

No, that wasn't God, that was Ptah. "Ptah is the creator god par excellence: He is considered the demiurge who existed before all things, and by his willfulness, thought the world. It was first conceived by Thought, and realized by the Word: Ptah conceives the world by the thought of his heart and gives life through the magic of his Word. That which Ptah commanded was created, with which the constituents of nature, fauna, and flora, are contained." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptah The writer(s) of the OT just heard that story and thought "What a neat idea. We'll just copy the story and attribute it to our god. In 2000 years nobody will notice the plagiarism."

[arian]

Nothing does exist

OK, this is a bad start. The existence of literally anything and everything proves this wrong by definition.

, and I can prove it with a simple scientific experiment. I can put 'nothing' in your hand and you will know you are actually holding 'nothing'.

This is neither scientific, nor is it proof of anything. This is bad semantics.

Consider how your "experiment" will produce a different result if I have a pen in my hand before you put nothing in it.

It works like this: if I have something in my hand before the experiment, I'll still have that same thing in my hand after you put nothing in it. If I have nothing in my hand before the experiment, I'll still have nothing in my hand after you put nothing in it.

In other words, "putting nothing in my hand" produces no effect. It is a non-event.

This is different from an actual event, such as putting something in my hand. For example, putting a pencil in my hand will always result in there being a pencil in my hand, regardless of anything else my hand may or may not be holding.

What you are doing, as theists often do, is grammatically treating the word "nothing" like you would grammatically treat an actual thing. Only from doing so does any of this nonsense come.

Ah, you definitely deserve a chair with those geniuses the next time there is a debate on 'nothing'. You fit right in.

Hold your hand out and open your palm, I have a bowling ball above the palm of your hand. Do you feel the gravity on the bowling ball I am holding above your hand?
Do you feel the gravity between your hand and the bowling ball, because I am telling you there is a ten lb. gravity in action between your hand and the bowling ball I am holding above it.

No, don't feel it yet? How about seeing anything pulling on the bowling ball, .. no? Put your head between your palm and the bowling ball, .. hear anything? No?

So would you say there is no gravity pulling on the bowling ball, or that I failed to show you that gravity exists since you cannot feel, see, sense, smell, taste, the gravity that is there between your palm acting on the bowling ball?

Neither. I would say that you do not understand gravity.

So what would your conclusion be, that the bowling ball is just heavy, there is nothing pulling on it? That if there was something pulling on it you would be able to feel it, or see it, or taste it, or at least smell it, right?

The earth is pulling on it.

Someone might say that "gravity is pulling on it", but if I were giving a strict philosophy test I wouldn't give full points for that answer. Gravity is simply the method by which the earth is pulling the bowling ball.

As I said, I can prove the existence of 'nothing', and put it right in your hand and you will know you are actually holding 'nothing'.

Indeed, I am quite convinced that you have proven nothing.

Oh, and never mind about any scholarship for my kids to ASU, wouldn't want to stupefy them and have them end up thinking they are apes or some other evolving horrendous GM accident.

Also, because of what THEY did to my son today, I will do anything and everything in my power to discourage them from going to college. Education is no longer a benefit to those acquiring it.
The pre-requirements for a job today is: "Do you believe in God?"

No?

Good, you are hired.

You hate God and have ideas how you can mock God and those believing in God?

Great, now you are promoted, .. up till the time we decide to kill you since you are of the wrong race, or took too many sick days, or because you are getting too old, or because you WILL get too old, or because we just want to kill somebody today.

I think this would be more appropriate for Random Ramblings.

"Gravity is simply the method by which the earth is pulling the bowling ball."

And this relates to me being able to prove the existence of 'nothing' how?

Thank you FarWonderer for the rest of your very informative responses, I have learned a great deal. I have also learned how 'not to' randomly ramble.

[arian]

"Big-Bang!"

Brrrrr, .. got chills running down my spine! Excellent, now what's the story behind it? Got to have a story, and hopefully we can build on it to make people believe there is No ID in Creation, no God!

The person who came up with the Big Bang theory was a priest and obviously a believer in God. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre Why would he be interested in making people believe there is no God?

He was a Catholic, right? So he wasn't really interested in making people believe there was no God (denying their main income), but that 'god' was just an idea, a 'what', the results of many/plural religious ideas creating one idea; what?-god.

George understood that the Trinity plural 'what' (the idea 'god') couldn't really create anything, even a speck of string, not alone an entire universe out of nothing, so he had to build a fairytale for the existence of the universe, and the Big-bang idea came up. And I'm sure this came to him by divine revelation, because it has created another religion within his already established Catholic religion.
Except now this 'what', the idea of god now could create, and the story grew engulfing science.

[arian]

Hold your hand out and open your palm, I have a bowling ball above the palm of your hand. Do you feel the gravity on the bowling ball I am holding above your hand?
Do you feel the gravity between your hand and the bowling ball, because I am telling you there is a ten lb. gravity in action between your hand and the bowling ball I am holding above it.

No, don't feel it yet? How about seeing anything pulling on the bowling ball, .. no? Put your head between your palm and the bowling ball, .. hear anything? No?

So would you say there is no gravity pulling on the bowling ball, or that I failed to show you that gravity exists since you cannot feel, see, sense, smell, taste, the gravity that is there between your palm acting on the bowling ball?

So what would your conclusion be, that the bowling ball is just heavy, there is nothing pulling on it? That if there was something pulling on it you would be able to feel it, or see it, or taste it, or at least smell it, right?

As I said, I can prove the existence of 'nothing', and put it right in your hand and you will know you are actually holding 'nothing'.

The gravitational attraction between the Earth and a bowling ball isn't supposed to have a look, smell, or taste, and you didn't discover it.

That's right, it doesn't, just like 'nothing', right? So how come one (gravity) you can understand, yet the existence of 'nothing', you can't?

Newton explained the power of gravity, and I can explain the 'power' of nothing, .. but no one has yet even shown the slightest interest, I mean real interest in understanding it outside of a debate most consider 'Random Rambling'??

I discovered 'nothing', identified it, scientifically prove it's existence, only I am not a scientist by schooling, I couldn't devise a mathematical formula like Isaak Newton did for gravity, (not without some help) so I am beginning to see why people doubt my claim!?

Oh yea, .. soon as I mention the word 'God', the religious fanatics who took over science start to scream; "Eeeegad!!! He said God, .. don't help him!" But 'oh God', if you guys knew the power of 'nothing'?

[Star]

Hold your hand out and open your palm, I have a bowling ball above the palm of your hand. Do you feel the gravity on the bowling ball I am holding above your hand?
Do you feel the gravity between your hand and the bowling ball, because I am telling you there is a ten lb. gravity in action between your hand and the bowling ball I am holding above it.

No, don't feel it yet? How about seeing anything pulling on the bowling ball, .. no? Put your head between your palm and the bowling ball, .. hear anything? No?

So would you say there is no gravity pulling on the bowling ball, or that I failed to show you that gravity exists since you cannot feel, see, sense, smell, taste, the gravity that is there between your palm acting on the bowling ball?

So what would your conclusion be, that the bowling ball is just heavy, there is nothing pulling on it? That if there was something pulling on it you would be able to feel it, or see it, or taste it, or at least smell it, right?

As I said, I can prove the existence of 'nothing', and put it right in your hand and you will know you are actually holding 'nothing'.

The gravitational attraction between the Earth and a bowling ball isn't supposed to have a look, smell, or taste, and you didn't discover it.

That's right, it doesn't, just like 'nothing', right? So how come one (gravity) you can understand, yet the existence of 'nothing', you can't?

Newton explained the power of gravity, and I can explain the 'power' of nothing, .. but no one has yet even shown the slightest interest, I mean real interest in understanding it outside of a debate most consider 'Random Rambling'??

I discovered 'nothing', identified it, scientifically prove it's existence, only I am not a scientist by schooling, I couldn't devise a mathematical formula like Isaak Newton did for gravity, (not without some help) so I am beginning to see why people doubt my claim!?

Oh yea, .. soon as I mention the word 'God', the religious fanatics who took over science start to scream; "Eeeegad!!! He said God, .. don't help him!" But 'oh God', if you guys knew the power of 'nothing'?

No, humans not being able to sense something isn't the criteria for it being "nothing."

The gravitational field's force carrier is the graviton. Per Einstein, mass curves spacetime, and our perception of this is gravity. We only feel our own gravitational attraction to the Earth, not other small objects, even if we're in between them and the Earth. Both the ball and our hands feel the same 1g of acceleration exerted in an upward direction from the ground.

You're on the side of the "religious fanatics," not I.

[Deidre32]

I've come to accept the term to mean nothing that can be defined just yet, as we define everything that came after it. (relating to the Big Bang)

Nothing isn't really "no thing" at all. It just isn't definable until science knows more and can define it.

Just my thoughts!

[arian]

Hold your hand out and open your palm, I have a bowling ball above the palm of your hand. Do you feel the gravity on the bowling ball I am holding above your hand?
Do you feel the gravity between your hand and the bowling ball, because I am telling you there is a ten lb. gravity in action between your hand and the bowling ball I am holding above it.

No, don't feel it yet? How about seeing anything pulling on the bowling ball, .. no? Put your head between your palm and the bowling ball, .. hear anything? No?

So would you say there is no gravity pulling on the bowling ball, or that I failed to show you that gravity exists since you cannot feel, see, sense, smell, taste, the gravity that is there between your palm acting on the bowling ball?

So what would your conclusion be, that the bowling ball is just heavy, there is nothing pulling on it? That if there was something pulling on it you would be able to feel it, or see it, or taste it, or at least smell it, right?

As I said, I can prove the existence of 'nothing', and put it right in your hand and you will know you are actually holding 'nothing'.

The gravitational attraction between the Earth and a bowling ball isn't supposed to have a look, smell, or taste, and you didn't discover it.

That's right, it doesn't, just like 'nothing', right? So how come one (gravity) you can understand, yet the existence of 'nothing', you can't?

Newton explained the power of gravity, and I can explain the 'power' of nothing, .. but no one has yet even shown the slightest interest, I mean real interest in understanding it outside of a debate most consider 'Random Rambling'??

I discovered 'nothing', identified it, scientifically prove it's existence, only I am not a scientist by schooling, I couldn't devise a mathematical formula like Isaak Newton did for gravity, (not without some help) so I am beginning to see why people doubt my claim!?

Oh yea, .. soon as I mention the word 'God', the religious fanatics who took over science start to scream; "Eeeegad!!! He said God, .. don't help him!" But 'oh God', if you guys knew the power of 'nothing'?

No, humans not being able to sense something isn't the criteria for it being "nothing."

I can also show you the gravitational forces acting on 'nothing', and you will know that gravity is in action on the 'nothing' you are holding in your hand. Another word, you will know the difference between the two 'things', 'nothing' and 'gravity', being that neither one can be sensed (outside the gravity pulling on an object in your hand that contains the 'nothing')

The gravitational field's force carrier is the graviton. Per Einstein, mass curves spacetime, and our perception of this is gravity.

So you can perceive gravity? I don't understand. I know we can perceive mass, and I doubt you mean mass is bending Spacetime not gravity?!

Also, please explain to me how you perceive "curved Spacetime"?
Now maybe Einstein could 'perceive' mass bending Spacetime, but the way I see/understand it is that 'time' doesn't exist. 'Time' is what we call death and decay. Time will be done away with when death and decay is put to rest, buried in hell. So what was Einstein perceiving really?

But then, this is science a notch above the human brains comprehension. You have to use your mind to understand it.

We only feel our own gravitational attraction to the Earth, not other small objects, even if we're in between them and the Earth. Both the ball and our hands feel the same 1g of acceleration exerted in an upward direction from the ground.

Wait, .. then it is not mass that creates gravity. Because if a great mass was above me, I should weigh less! The object of great mass would be pulling me upwards according to its mass/gravity ratio. No matter how small of a pull compared to the earth, it should still be measurable, no? Like if I was driving into a deep tunnel under a giant mountain, my weigh should be noticeably less then before I entered the tunnel, no?

You're on the side of the "religious fanatics," not I.

Really? Isn't it you who 'believes' in the Big bang, a universe that appeared out of nowhere, in no time and inflating into nothing? Who believes in a Biological Evolution from a wet rock, and that now after billions of years you are an evolving ape? Or in 'infinite numbers'? Or in infinite possibilities before the existence of the dice, or things that could create those possibilities? Infinite possibilities before even space and time mind you? How is 'infinite possibilities' going to create anything before infinity, space and time even existed?

That's like saying: "The odds of 'nothing' is very, very high!"

I on the other hand am a scientist, I observe the universe and the world around me, not in tales of universes that may or may not be popping in and out of existence like bubbles, .. in 'nothing'? Or what may or may not have caused a Big bang 13.75 billion years ago creating our universe which may or may not have always existed? Meaning a 13.75 billion year old eternity, and a 90 billion light year in diameter infinity!?

I can also differentiate between finite and infinite, which means I know the difference between a Creator, and the created. I KNOW God because of this evidence. The rest is obvious.

[arian]

I've come to accept the term to mean nothing that can be defined just yet, as we define everything that came after it. (relating to the Big Bang)

Nothing isn't really "no thing" at all. It just isn't definable until science knows more and can define it.

Just my thoughts!

Hello Deidre32, welcome to the forum.

Interesting thoughts, only I can define nothing, and show it exists like anything else.
Nothing IS 'nothing', it exists just as everything else exists, and I can prove it.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us, .. so what do you think of what I just said?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 36 by Deidre32]

I am not so sure science can define nothing. After all nothing in essence is just a philosophical concept. I am not even sure nothing can exist given the parameters of what we understand about the universe. Of course this brings up another problem and that is that nothing is something at least in english anyways since nothing is a pronoun and pronouns are things nothing is something or at the very least can be referred to as a thing.

So is nothing particularly useful? I would have to say no at least not in debate.

[Deidre32]

Sorry, I can't figure out how to multi quote lol
:-}}

I don't think nothing is merely philosophical. Scientists define it differently than lay people. It's not "no thing" as suggested in the OP. There had to be something not yet definable in physics that caused the Big Bang.

Science says for now, it's "uncaused." But that doesn't translate to "no thing" existing pre Big Bang.

I'm an atheist. As a Christian, I thought differently about all this. Lol


((On an unrelated note, why doesn't my sig show?))