"Nothing" isn't a real concept

[StayTuned]

Yes, physics doesn't allow for "nothing", but the whole point is that "outside the universe", there isn't some domain where physics is applied. There is literally nothing in a philosophical sense.

Yes, in a philosophical sense. But just because we do not know what it might be, does not mean that there is really nothing outside. No matter, no particles, nothing. I dont think thats true.

It can be created out of nothing because space itself is a quanta-mechanical "object". It has quantum properties in the same sense particles do. The whole phenomenon is called quantum fluctuation.

Isnt it true that particles can pop in and out of existence whenever "they feel like it", due to quantum fluctuations? Wouldnt those quantum fluctuations then be "the something"?

[Wikiy]

Yes, in a philosophical sense. But just because we do not know what it might be, does not mean that there is really nothing outside. No matter, no particles, nothing. I dont think thats true.

Well, if there is something, it wont be matter, particles or space, because we know those are bound to out universe. It would have to be something completely different. At the moment, physics doesn't require anything to exist "outside" for the universe to work.

Isnt it true that particles can pop in and out of existence whenever "they feel like it", due to quantum fluctuations? Wouldnt those quantum fluctuations then be "the something"?

No, because Lawrence Krauss fails to mention he's talking about space. Quantum fluctuations haven't been observed outside space, because, well, then it would be nothing. He says "nothing" because that is what people usually think space is, which is simply false. Space is a quanta-mechanical field, and a cubic meter of it has, i think, 10^-8 J of energy.

[dwarven]

Question:What would i have to change to be called malthadius?

answer: nothing

Question: what could make me love you(not aimed at anyone in particular)?

Answer nothing

How about in scientific terms? We can definitely talk about and think about things that don't exist.

[Powerogue]

it'd certainly make math a lot stranger if we tried to remove 0.

[Ashnazg]

Yes but you can't treat something outside the universe as nothing just because nothing fills it. That's the point, there is nothing to be filled, no 3D space, simply nothing, as far as we know.

The concept of "outside the universe" is meaningless, its an impossibility. Much like a square circle.

Also, the universe has to be expanding into something. That is "no thing", literally.

No, it does not. You're thinking in terms applicable to human experiences. When the existence itself is expanding, it doesn't need to expand into "anything" because there isn't anything but the universe itself.

[Deleted]

Strictly speaking "nothing" has to be something, the reason being that we have named it so it must be there simply because you can't name something that does not exist as there would be nothing to name.

At the very least it is a word. Beyond that it's an absence of something or somethings. The question is, is an absence a thing of it's own?

[Verain]

Wait, eliminate it from our vocabulary?

What would we replace it with?



NOTHING?

[lopk]

Nothing isn't a real concept?

Nothing is a concept, it's just not real.

Nothing is lack of something. Lack of something is real.

To be fair, nothing isn't the only thing in this boat.

Darkness doesn't exist. Only lack of light.

Coldness doesn't exist. Only lack of heat.

It's nit-picky, to say it nicely.

[Ashnazg]

Nothing, in practicality, means nothing out of the ordinary. When you look at an empty glass, and you say there is nothing in it, you're not saying its literally void of everything, you're saying there is nothing but the background noise in it, the background noise being whatever medium you live in, or are talking about.

E.g. if you're listening to radio waves and you hear static - nothing becomes the "default" state of static - ergo you say: "I hear nothing". If you're talking about space - nothing means a segment of space with only background radiation in it. And so on.

[alturic]

Yes but you can't treat something outside the universe as nothing just because nothing fills it. That's the point, there is nothing to be filled, no 3D space, simply nothing, as far as we know.

This is getting a little deep for me, since I don't really like space, nor ever really thought about it, but if you can't see something, how can you say it's not empty?

---------- Post added 2012-08-30 at 06:14 PM ----------

Wait, eliminate it from our vocabulary?

What would we replace it with?



NOTHING?

This has been the best response I've seen in a thread, in a long time. :P

[Knight Gil]

What is reality anyway?

[Dendrek]

What is reality anyway?

Reality is the nonexistence of nothing that makes up everything.

[Landin55]

"Hey can you see anything?"
"No nothing, its pitch black..."
"Are you up to anything important?"
"Nothing atm."
"Yo dawg you got anything for me?"
"Nah mang I got nothing."
ETC,ETC..

[Jenks3]

I feel that it's just something we say in conversation when there really is something. What if we eliminated this word from our vocabulary?

Are you saying 0 isn't a correct mathematical concept either? Because all the machines running on a binary base might have a bone to pick with you

[dwarven]

Are you saying 0 isn't a correct mathematical concept either? Because all the machines running on a binary base might have a bone to pick with you

That doesn't have to do with the concept of nothing. If you hold out your hand and say you have 0 oranges, that's true, but there is atmosphere right above your hand.

[dwarven]

So zero doesn't exist?

Hmm, but math works so well with a "nothing."

There's a difference between nothing, and a variable being zero.

[schwarzkopf]

I feel that it's just something we say in conversation when there really is something. What if we eliminated this word from our vocabulary?

What would be left in it's place once you removed it ?

Go on ... tell me

Damn - beaten.

[Dendrek]

So zero doesn't exist?

Hmm, but math works so well with a "nothing."

In mathematical terms,
nothing =/= zero
nothing = undefined

[dwarven]

So a philosophical "nothing?"

No. Just because one thing doesn't exist, it doesn't mean something else doesn't exist in its place.

[Dendrek]

Isn't that a variable?

I assume you mean "Isn't a variable undefined"? If so, not technically. The concept of "undefined" in math means it's impossible to state a value. An example would be 0/0. That doesn't equal 1, or 0 or infinity. It equals "nothing" because there is nothing that it can be equalled to. In a case of a variable, we may not know what the value is, but the variable itself is assumed to be "defined" in that some real value can be plugged into it. It's also potentially possible that a variable is "undefined" but in that case it breaks the equation. It's impossible to solve an equation with an undefined variable.