How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Nothing   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Nothing

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
dreamer1 12 5 24
Member
since 12-11-2000
Posts 172
crossing between


25 posted 01-02-2001 09:48 PM       View Profile for dreamer1 12 5 24   Email dreamer1 12 5 24   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for dreamer1 12 5 24

But if "nothing" exists outside of the universe, the second a spaceship goes through a black hole, "something" exists outside of the universe.
In my dictionary "nothing" is defined as "no thing, not anything at all"
I would have to agree that whether or not nothing exists depends on the context it is used in.

....peace as a primary objective is dangerous because it implies that we would sacrifice anything for the sake of it....
Robert Kaplan
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


26 posted 01-02-2001 09:59 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

"nothing" to me is an abstract term which really indicates the abscence of "something" which someone has identified.   But it seems to me since it is an abstract term as such, you must play by the unwritten rules of common sense. . .  The word existence is also an abstract term.  Abstract terms cannot survive on their own.   The abstract must be coupled with another idea.  It has to be connected.  For example, it is meaningless to talk about existence until you give it an object to work with.  The BALL exists.  CARS exist, etc...  But you cannot just talk about existence without a partner.  It just so happens that the abstract term "nothing" is not connected with the presence or existence of things but the absence of things.  So it is meaningless to say that "nothing" exists, because we already pre-decided that it would signify non-existence or absence.  Does nothing exist as a concept, as an idea in our minds?  Yes of course.  Does actual "nothingness" exist?  Don't be foolish, by definition we already know nothingness refers to non-existence... So the only nothingness that exists is the concept in our minds.  The real nothingness "if all other things are really absent" does the opposite, it ceases to exist... or rather everything else ceases to exist.  If there were absolute nothingness ... absolutely nothing at all would exist including the concept of nothingness (because there has to be someone to perceive the utter absence of identified entities.  No mind = No concept).  
     Now I'm even more confused I think!  But the closest thing to absolute nothingness that I can think of is before God created the universe.  The bible says that "The Earth was without form and void and darkness was on the face of the deep".  This language to me suggests nonentity and disorder in the physical order of things.  But as some of you pointed out earlier, "something" has always existed.  I believe the physical universe including the time/ space matrix as we know it had a beginning point, but before that, God and the spiritual world existed from eternity.  So there was never really an absolute nothingness.  
Whew!  I'm glad I sorted out such a grand metaphysical problem!   But if you asked me how I did it,  I'll just have to reply:

"Ah,  it was nothing."      
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


27 posted 01-03-2001 02:02 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

When did nothing become absolute nothing?

What does it mean to have an absolute something?

Dreamer and Stephanapolous seem to me to be on the right track but I don't understand why everybody finds this difficult.

No word in a language is positive in and of itself (a word can't stand outside a language). As a result, anything we think, anything we sense, can't stand by itself.

We have these ideas, senses, whatever because of their relationship to other things.

Absolutes will always get you into trouble.

Brad
Ted Reynolds
Member
since 12-15-1999
Posts 335


28 posted 01-03-2001 07:42 AM       View Profile for Ted Reynolds   Email Ted Reynolds   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ted Reynolds

Let's remember, Brad, that this thread started when Poeminister asked "What's Nothing.  Does it exist??"

You responded "The answer is yes. What is the problem here?"

As I tried to point out back then, the problem was exactly what you now recognize . . . postulating an Absolute out of context.

And as for Jim suggesting I was drowning in semantics.  He started from the position "'Nothing' is a pronoun." But the question raised was "What's Nothing.  Does it exist??" We were definitely questioning Nothing as an absolute noun, not a pronoun (and not a mere synonym for a vacuum.)

Haven't had time to read the rest of the thread yet, but it's nice to be back.  Cheers.


fractal007
Member Elite
since 06-01-2000
Posts 2032


29 posted 01-03-2001 12:09 PM       View Profile for fractal007   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for fractal007

I agree with Stephanos.  God and all do inhabit the "spiritual realm."  However, the existance of a spiritual realm does not preclude the existance of absolute nothing.  Frankly, the spiritual realm is some other paralell abstract place which floats over the physical universe.  It effects it in many ways.  But it is NOT absolutely outside the universe.  However, it is not detectable to our instruments, which is why many have decided that science has precluded the existance of a spiritual realm.  

Getting back on track, there may be a spiritual realm which exists, however, it does not preclude the existance of nothingness.  I believe that the spiritual realm is our word for that region where God and all exist.  They created the physical universe using some method or another.  I don't really want to debate how that took place, because we all have our own beliefs, and such discussions usually end up being highly unproductive.  That is, after all the insults about people being foolish enough to believe this or that have been hurled around the room.  So, absolute nothingness is defined by the nonexistance of the physical realm.  I think that without the current plain which the universe is on, something from the universe cannot exist.  Just like how something from the hard drive on your computer cannot just appear on a table somewhere, because it must manifest itself through the electronics and all, that make up the HD.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


30 posted 01-09-2001 07:47 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Ted,
I'll concede you understood the question better than I did. But this question makes no sense to me as a result.

By the same token though, you have to also say that Something doesn't exist.

Brad
Ted Reynolds
Member
since 12-15-1999
Posts 335


31 posted 01-10-2001 07:57 AM       View Profile for Ted Reynolds   Email Ted Reynolds   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ted Reynolds

Okay, Brad, agreed. SOMETHING doesn't exist.  But I think you'll agree that an awful lot of "somethings" (without universalizing capital letters) DO exist?  (Me being emphatically one . . .)
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


32 posted 01-10-2001 11:31 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

I'll give you that.

Brad
fractal007
Member Elite
since 06-01-2000
Posts 2032


33 posted 01-10-2001 02:37 PM       View Profile for fractal007   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for fractal007

Brad and Ted:

I read somewhere that only 0.0001% of the known universe is actually occupied by something.  SO a lot of the universe is really just empty space and "nothingness".

I have a bit of a derrivative question for anyone who's interested:

Do you think it's possible for there to be places in the universe in which the temperature is absolute zero?  This is a notion which has been put forward by some scientists.  I disagree with it because of the low level heat caused by entropy.  But I wouldn't mind hearing the opinions of others on this.

Thankyou for your attention.
Ted Reynolds
Member
since 12-15-1999
Posts 335


34 posted 01-11-2001 07:01 AM       View Profile for Ted Reynolds   Email Ted Reynolds   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ted Reynolds

Dear Fracta1007 (007 for short?):

My first take on your query. If the universe is an unbroken continuity throughout, then it would seem that, since there's heat in SOME places, and can't be LESS than zero anywhere, and the effect of heat (or particle motion) is to extend to an even uniformity . . . then logically there must be SOME miniscule degree of heat EVERYwhere.

My second take.  There's still a lot we don't know about the universe.  If there's any condition or barrier, either on a large scale or locally, which completely DAMPS all motion, heat would not be able to pass beyond it.  The same would apply if there hasn't yet been enough time for heat motion to reach any particular area of space (not possible by Big Bang theory, but I still have my doubts about that.)

     My third take.  What about the incredibly small regions BETWEEN the smallest particles anywhere?  The very CONCEPT of heat (i.e. particle motion) couldn't apply there.

Interesting.
fractal007
Member Elite
since 06-01-2000
Posts 2032


35 posted 01-11-2001 01:25 PM       View Profile for fractal007   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for fractal007

Ted, and everyone:

Forgot to to my homework, lol.

Some of you may be at my question on the universe.  I just posed a question on dark matter with regards to the universe.  

Now we have a bit of a problem, because nobody is quite sure about just what dark matter is made of.  So, we may need to take dark matter into account in this discussion.
mark woolard
Member
since 01-02-2001
Posts 148


36 posted 01-11-2001 02:49 PM       View Profile for mark woolard   Email mark woolard   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for mark woolard

something is something
if anything is nothing
still something it is it is

wind will find voice
as opposite nothing
for nothing is nothing is everything

nothing imagined
is something that is.
however we word it
it's already read.

before and foreafter
is invisible something

to say now is nothing
is still saying something.

So lovers of nothing
are still loving something:
the idea of a nothing
is something that is.

Does this answer the unanswer?
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Nothing   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors