something from nothing?

[Parshvik Chintan]

Photons are their own antiparticle, so perhaps light is both the 1 and -1 in your analogy.

it was meant more as an abstract analogy than a concrete example...

basically i am saying that the unification of duality results in true nothingness (as the opposing forces cancel each other out)

 

[Mr.Peabody]

Something from nothing doesn't make sense given the laws of cause and effect we have here, now. But those laws only apply here and now. Can effect create cause in a non-linear system? It it possible to have such a non-linear system?

I worry our poor little human brains are unable to understand such things as nothingness, non-linear time, and higher dimensions.

I think what you all have arrived to is the total sum of the universe. The duality, such as the particle and anti-particle of light. The whole system sums to zero, and yet there's the light wave. I think maybe the entire universe sums to zero. Much like the tiny particles that split on their own out of the vacuum of space, only to recombine back to nothing, so too is our universe. Makes you wonder about things like karma, if the universe sums to zero, everyone get's back what they do, universal justice.

 

[DeMenTed]

It's not as stupid as it sounds. If nothing did exist then it would make it a something. This is where the paradox comes in though.

I feel this thinking is incorrect. Not to get too word play-ish but your trying to make the absence of something a thing and it doesn't work that way. Right there in your sentence your saying nothing exists but its the exact opposite of that. There is NOTHING to exist. Nothing can not exists. It reminds me of the flawed argument that lack of belief is in itself a belief which is isn't.

Lets say there was an area within space that was a total negative vacume and within this empty space there was no matter or mass, no mass-less particles, no time, no potential wave functions nada. The only reason your thinking that this void is a thing is because you are conceiving or thinking about it. That thought is a something but this void itself is nothing.

At least that's how I see it. Its impossible for us to accurately imagine nothing because the very act in itself is something. But remove the thinker from the equation and there is nothing there.

You say an area within space with a negative vacuum etc but for this void to exist within space wouldn't it need to be part of the space fabric quantum foam? So at the very least this void would be filled with quantum foam lol. Och i suppose we will never know

 

[christian]

Och i suppose we will never know

You're right Demented!

There's a lot we will never know, but there is something i know. I know that if one thinks about something that it grows, and is food for their imagination. Talking about it creates a scene!

-In this way it's easily possible to create something from 'nothing'. Our minds have the abilities to create miracles out of thin air! Seeing is believing when we physically manifest our innermost thoughts, we are the creators of our destiny..

Look at websites, look at this scene.. It exists thanks to imagination and creating a place where talk can flourish. It's a trip in itself, and it comes out of thin air...

How are you these days, i see you here as another place disappears..

 

[DeMenTed]

Och i suppose we will never know

You're right Demented!

There's a lot we will never know, but there is something i know. I know that if one thinks about something that it grows, and is food for their imagination. Talking about it creates a scene!

-In this way it's easily possible to create something from 'nothing'. Our minds have the abilities to create miracles out of thin air! Seeing is believing when we physically manifest our innermost thoughts, we are the creators of our destiny..

Look at websites, look at this scene.. It exists thanks to imagination and creating a place where talk can flourish. It's a trip in itself, and it comes out of thin air...

How are you these days, i see you here as another place disappears..

Thats what i was saying earlier nothing is all in the mind.

Yeah i'm alright m8 cheers. I seen that other place is shut down, i wasn't on it anymore anyway. I'll pm you later

 

[christian]

Thats what i was saying earlier nothing is all in the mind.

Sort of like 'out of nothing always comes something, and we can make it work for or against us'...

Looking fwd to hear from you. Cheers.

 

[Parshvik Chintan]

Much like the tiny particles that split on their own out of the vacuum of space, only to recombine back to nothing

exactly!
like if you have a magnetic field, but combine the positive and negative, they would cancel each other out and the field would be no more.

only what i am proposing, is that within nothing, the potential for positive and negative, light and dark exist. the nothingness can be split into somethingness.

so that you could take this positive and negative, combine them into nothingness, then split them back into somethingness. theoretically.

it seems to be a straightforward and simple mathematical equation, but it seems almost too obvious to be correct.

 

[nen888]

^..you mean like Phase Cancellation..?

 

[Parshvik Chintan]

^..you mean like Phase Cancellation..?

kinda, (i am still unclear as to whether the waveforms fully cease to exist, in which case that would be a perfect analogy) yeah.

 

[hixidom]

Particles that are spontaneously created in a vacuum do not come from nothing. They have a net positive energy that was present before they were created. This energy is stored in things like gravitational fields which permeate throughout space. When virtual particles are created in that gravitational field, they take energy from the object emitting the field. So I would say that such particle creation is not an example of something from nothing because there is energy present from which the particles are created. When the particles annihilate, they don't become nothing: They emit energy.

 

[DeMenTed]

Nothing could possibly exist between the vibrations of the strings in string theory but the string would enter this void every time it oscillates probably leaving some sort of energy there though. Doh my head hurts

 

[hixidom]

I don't know anything about string theory, but I'd bet that it posits that space is a multi-dimensional manifold on which the strings exist. Nothing could exist between strings on the manifold, but that doesn't mean that the manifold itself could not store energy within its own curvy structure.

String theory makes my head hurt too, and I don't even think about it.

 

[nen888]

..yeah, Parshvik C i don't know what 'happens' to the energy when it's totally phase cancelled either..
philadelphia experiment anyone..?

 

[Parshvik Chintan]

Nothing could possibly exist between the vibrations of the strings in string theory but the string would enter this void every time it oscillates probably leaving some sort of energy there though. Doh my head hurts

i am saying nothing exists only in contrast to this reality.

we are on the other side of the equation.

on one side there would be nothingness, the other duality.
and the unification of duality results in nothingness (dark cancels light and light cancels dark)

the only thing we have (that would appear to be nothing) is the equivalent of -1

here we have a thing, and its opposite (seemingly no-thing, but truly it would be un-thing)

 

[InfiniteFacticity]

I don't know anything about string theory, but I'd bet that it posits that space is a multi-dimensional manifold on which the strings exist. Nothing could exist between strings on the manifold, but that doesn't mean that the manifold itself could not store energy within its own curvy structure.

String theory makes my head hurt too, and I don't even think about it.

Educate your self! If you want.

http://www.superstringtheory.com/basics/index.html

http://athome.harvard.edu/programs/sst/video/sst1_5.html

http://www.ted.com/talks/brian_greene_on_string_theory.html

There is quite a bit of knowledge out in the interwebs that's free and high-quality.

 

[nen888]

I don't know anything about string theory, but I'd bet that it posits that space is a multi-dimensional manifold on which the strings exist. Nothing could exist between strings on the manifold, but that doesn't mean that the manifold itself could not store energy within its own curvy structure.

String theory makes my head hurt too, and I don't even think about it.

Educate your self! If you want. http://athome.harvard.edu/programs/sst/video/sst1_5.html
There is quite a bit of knowledge out in the interwebs that's free and high-quality.

..i'll second that..hixidom you don't know the joys you deny yourself!
Calabi-Yau and Shing-Tung..

 

[Parshvik Chintan]

the more i ponder this, the more i am convinced it is an accurate representation of our reality.

i must admit when i first transcribed this to the metaphor of black and white, i was perplexed by the color grey.

but then, after thinking on white (the reflection of all light) and black (the absorbtion of all light), i realized that they fundamentally can't be combined (you can't both reflect and absorb all light), only mixed.


i mean.. if it isn't unreasonable to postulate a dualistic view of the universe.. would this be any more unreasonable as an addition?

Wisdom of Balance: The Reluctant Messenger - Science Religion Spirituality God Allah Qur'an Bible Torah Codes Taoism Judaism Christianity Islam Buddhism Buddha Hindu Sihkism Kabbalah Sufi Mysticism Jewish Taoist faith Quantum Relativity Universe

 

[Psychelectric]

I hate to be this guy, but given a philosophical debate, terms need to be defined or things quickly take a turn for a semantics debate, which just goes round around round.

How would you define "nothing"?
Is it the absence of "something"?

Im not trying to be a smartass but with such general terms it can be easy for the point to be missed of what's trying to be conveyed. When you say "something" are you simply referring to matter? If that's the case is antimatter considered "nothing"?

My view of the world is that, in terms of absolutes, "nothing", doesn't actually exist. It's merely a term used to relate to various things. I don't think this issue is a duality.

Such as when you look at an empty room and say that there is "nothing" there, you really mean that there are no objects there, but there is air, photons, molecules, quarks, and many other things both on the subatomic level and other nuances related to the concept of higher dimensions encroaching on the plane that we are measuring.

So in that regard something can't come from nothing, because nothing is impossible, it's only an idea that floats around our minds. When it comes to math, you are merely relating concepts, 0 is still something, it's the balance between negative and positive. It's used to relate various states, but that understanding of math can not relate to an absolute view of the universe. Something and nothing is not like light and dark, it's the difference between physical reality (something) and an abstract concept (nothing).

What I'm trying to say is that "Nothing" doesn't actually exist in the real world. Everywhere there is "Something".

(That's how the universe looks to me with my limited knowledge, likewise sorry if someone or "something" has mentioned this before.)

 

[Parshvik Chintan]

How would you define "nothing"?

zero, mathematically.

i do not know how much more blatant "no thing" could be. it is void of thingness.

Is it the absence of "something"?

obviously there are no somethings in nothing.

but, i would say what we call the absence of something may not necessarily be nothing.

in the same way we call a blank page absent of words (things) without realizing the page itself is a thing (unthing).

Im not trying to be a smartass but with such general terms it can be easy for the point to be missed of what's trying to be conveyed. When you say "something" are you simply referring to matter? If that's the case is antimatter considered "nothing"?

no, matter is a thing, and anti-matter is an unthing.

the combination of thing and unthing result in no-thing (as the thing is canceled out by unthing and vice-versa)

My view of the world is that, in terms of absolutes, "nothing", doesn't actually exist. It's merely a term used to relate to various things.

my view of the world is that nothing exists on the other side of the formula from duality.

and that nothing must exist, because where else can something come from?

also we can know nothing mathematically: 0.

Such as when you look at an empty room and say that there is "nothing" there, you really mean that there are no objects there, but there is air, photons, molecules, quarks, and many other things both on the subatomic level and other nuances related to the concept of higher dimensions encroaching on the plane that we are measuring.

PRECISELY MY POINT!!
all of those things (that we thing are nothing, but truly aren't) would be "unthing".

like the blank page of the book.

So in that regard something can't come from nothing, because nothing is impossible

i see no proof that nothing is impossible. only that nothing may not play the part in duality that we though it did (we mistake the -1 for 0, and so we think there is no 0)

0 is still something

but what it represents is not.
the concept itself is a thing, but it is the concept of no concept.

It's used to relate various states, but that understanding of math can not relate to an absolute view of the universe.

to my knowledge mathematics relate directly to our view of the universe.....

Something and nothing is not like light and dark

that is my point too.. dark would be unthing, not nothing

it's the difference between physical reality (something) and an abstract concept (nothing).

i will concede that nothing probably does not exist in this physical reality, but i hardly see how that is relevant (as soon as you divide nothing into something, there is no longer nothing)

What I'm trying to say is that "Nothing" doesn't actually exist in the real world. Everywhere there is "Something".

yes, but where did that something come from?

i am not saying we can witness nothing directly, i am saying that everything is either a positive or a negative something (matter and anti-matter work as a perfect illustration for this), that can either be combined into nothing, or divided out of nothing.

 

[DeMenTed]

2 guys sitting silently in a room and one of the guys says to the other guy "what did you say?" the other guy says "nothing"