Nothingness

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
hmm...ok....i see it as...

If you have no space(as in...generaly no space anywhere) or no time or no mass, anywhere in the universe...😖 than that would =nothingness.

Aaah i see what you said. Ok, my bad.

No, you cant have space and no time, you're right, but im saying that 'nothing' is not just in our mind, that such a thing can be...if there was no space time or mass.

Well, ok, but I don't think I was ever denying that. I was simply saying it was unusual to refer to space as an object of some sort.

(I wish space was not also a dimension, as it makes this convo very awkward)

what i mean was to question the infinity of the universe. If it is limited, then ...beyond it...would be what i can only TRY to percieve as absence of space. nothingness

No, that would not be the absence of space. Something that is an absence cannot itself be absent in of itself. Kind of a conceptual knot you have tied yourself in there.

aaa..but i didn not say that beyond the lmit of universe there is an absence of absence BECAUSE i don't consider that space is absence.
so beyond space....absence can..roam freely 🙂

If you do not consider space an abesnce, you are misdefining space.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Wrong way around. Space is an absence. If there is no space, that can only be because there is something there.

If you can better define what you mean it might help. 'In' space?

I ment that there is still something even if space itself is empty

Originally posted by Ushgarak
If you do not consider space an abesnce, you are misdefining space.

i wasn't trying to define space in the first place. Space is the absence of objects, at most......though even objects have space between the molecules and so on..
but i am questioning the absence of EVERYTHING...even absence of space. (so..absence of absence of objects 😉 🙂 )

Well vacuum is the preliminary stage of nothingness!
Well thats what a physicist would say. because....
there are no atoms in there 😉

but the philosophical nothingness does not exist.
because it wouldnt exist which meant it had no place in existence!

yes, well...as i said, i consider nothingness to be a concept.
however....i can wonder if that vacuum is infinit. if not..what lies beyond it?

Originally posted by eezy45
because it wouldnt exist which meant it had no place in existence!

Originally posted by DemonicGambit-2
Nothingness is nothing so therefore can't exsist

I think the non-existence of Nothingness is rather a linguistical problem... if you say "Nothing exists", it's a lie, but so is "Nothing doesn't exist"
It only works if you add an article - "The Nothingness exists", which would also mean specifying a certain Nothingness, but this specifying somehow implies that The Nothingness has something to disinguish it from the other Nothingness... though that would signify that it is not really nothing.

I personally also think that nothingness is a concept, a useful one maybe, but a concept.

I wonder, what would the border of Nothingness look like? Is it possible that there is something and the next moment there is nothing... no time, no materia, no temperature??

Originally posted by Dexx
i wasn't trying to define space in the first place. Space is the absence of objects, at most......though even objects have space between the molecules and so on..
but i am questioning the absence of EVERYTHING...even absence of space. (so..absence of absence of objects 😉 🙂 )

Then you are simply talking gibberish, I am afraid.

Space is an absence of things, and does not come under the term 'everything'.

You cannot absent an absent thing, witout therefore making things. If space is absent, that means an object is there instead.

argh...but space is IN objects also.

are you saying that there is no such thing as absence of space and objects? even as a concept?

The two are polar opposites, Dexx. Space is the lack of objects.

yes..well..how to put this.
let's say space is where objects are not, but COULD be.
what about where objects cannot be.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
The two are polar opposites, Dexx. Space is the lack of objects.

...and object is lack of space.

If this turns into physics...which it kinda has...i know nothing about physics 😖

not yet physics. it's just saying what space/oject is relating it with object/space. Just a connection between the two....i'm trying to look beyond it 🙂

Can I just point out that Storm asked if there was such a thing as "nothingness". We all know "space" exists, but she asked whether "nothingness" was simply a concept of the mind or in actual existence......

yes well that's where i'm trying to get. We know that space exists, and that objects exist. but if ONLY space and ojects exist, there nothingness doesn't.

but most of us do agree that it exists only at a conceptual level.