Can you get something from nothing? No you can't, because there was nothing to take from. Math proves this, unless you go into negative figures, but even then there is something to take from, in this case there is nothing. It's like that Stevie Wonder tune goes, nothing from nothing leaves nothing, you gotta have something.... blah blah blah.
That would still be 'no', no? The state of non-existence would exist, meaning it exists, meaning the exterior of that sphere exists.
*edit
Btw, I know connotation can't be conveyed in text, so I just want to let you know there's nothing dismissive or contentious in my replies in this thread. Just civil curiosity.
Originally posted by MF DELPHIt exists by its absence. It's a paradox, which is generally what you get when asking ultimate-type questions.
That would still be 'no', no? The state of non-existence would exist, meaning it exists, meaning the exterior of that sphere exists.
Originally posted by MF DELPHFunny, I was sensing earnest, civil curiosity.
Btw, I know connotation can't be conveyed in text, so I just want to let you know there's nothing dismissive or contentious in my replies in this thread. Just civil curiosity.
Re: Can non-existence exist?
Originally posted by MF DELPH
Simple but complex question:Can there be a true 'nothing', or would 'nothingness' still be a state of existence meaning it would need to 'exist', therefore negating that 'nothing' is truly 'nothing'?
Can non-existence exist?
Discuss.
Im going to say that "existence" is all we know so to imagine a form of non-existence is almost impossible. If Non-existence is impossible then that in and of itself would prove that there is a such thing as non-existence. If "non-existence" didn't exist then it itself would be lingering in non-existence".
Makes sense to me lol
Given that all abstract thought is based on ideas and relationships gleaned from empirical sensory data (i.e. you know the concept of 'sphere' only because you have seen one and can reimagine it that way), this question can't be answered. That is because the complete absence of all things is not something that can be sensed, and those who are sensory deprived quickly go insane.
Therefore the answer is "undetermined".
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Therefore nothingness does exist until we talk about it. 😉
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Given that all abstract thought is based on ideas and relationships gleaned from empirical sensory data (i.e. you know the concept of 'sphere' only because you have seen one and can reimagine it that way), this question can't be answered.
Essentially, this all points to the limitations of human imagination, conception and certainly language. Imho, the question of nothingness is "unanswerable" in that it forms an unsolvable paradox. In order to discuss "nothing" we want to picture or conceive of it as something, but then it's not nothing anymore. And even though I think this sentence -- "Nothing exists in the presence of infinite existence." -- takes a decent stab at it, upon first reading it, how can one not go "Huh?"
If I was gonna put a theological spin on this, I could say, "God created nothing by being everywhere."
Nothingness is all-around us. Let me introduce you to the Planck length!