Nothing does not exist.

[cherrybomb]

Va-va-voom! Title.

So you know how every philosopher and their mom is wondering when the universe started? When things came into existence? Well what if 'nothing' is just a human concept? What if there never was a beginning, and the universe was always there? Cuz think about it for one second; the universe is expanding, but how can it expand into 'nothing'? Just because life has a cycle of birth and death does not necessarily mean that the universe does.

'Nothing' might simply not exist.

 

[SomaSpice]

Oh yeah? Then how do you explain this:

Checkm8

 

[cherrybomb]

In all seriousness however, that is not emptiness

 

[SomaSpice]

Sure, I agree. What is just is, and the null equivalent of a certain existance must exist itself. If we consider infinity, say, if time and space are infinite then there is never a point where there is no time or space thus there is no true nothingness in the universe.

As for metaphysical concepts they're just a bunch of human constructions, so I don't think we can classify things like 'alive' and 'dead' onto existance and non-existance, but rather as an experiential or unexperiential state of existance.

 

[cherrybomb]

Sure, I agree. What is just is, and the null equivalent of a certain existance must exist itself. If we consider infinity, say, if time and space are infinite then there is never a point where there is no time or space thus there is no true nothingness in the universe.

As for metaphysical concepts they're just a bunch of human constructions, so I don't think we can classify things like 'alive' and 'dead' onto existance and non-existance, but rather as an experiential or unexperiential state of existance.

Exactly, but then it boggles my mind right; what on earth is the universe expanding into..

 

[s0ren]

This may be of interest: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nothingness/

Spoiler

But you should really read the manga and not the netflix adaption:

As a general rule, if you have ever had a vague philosophic thought, it is almost certain some loser german nerd has beat you to it. The question of nothingness and whether or not it exists has been argued about for at least 2000 years.

 

[SomaSpice]

Exactly, but then it boggles my mind right; what on earth is the universe expanding into..

I think its just that the objects in the universe are growing proportionally more distant within itself. Not that space is growing onto something.

 

[Aral]

Va-va-voom! Title.

So you know how every philosopher and their mom is wondering when the universe started? When things came into existence? Well what if 'nothing' is just a human concept? What if there never was a beginning, and the universe was always there? Cuz think about it for one second; the universe is expanding, but how can it expand into 'nothing'? Just because life has a cycle of birth and death does not necessarily mean that the universe does.

'Nothing' might simply not exist.

TBH, my rule is, if you can imagine it, it most likely exists on some level, even if not physically. Our imaginations are our most powerful tool to tap into alternate dimensions, the unseen, and the possibilities.

There's probably something beside our universe. Maybe another, and another, and another. Multiverse theory seems legit to me, tbh. I don't see where that universe would be standing otherwise.

 

[SomaSpice]

As a general rule, if you have ever had a vague philosophic thought, it is almost certain some loser german nerd has beat you to it. The question of nothingness and whether or not it exists has been argued about for at least 2000 years.

Yeah, so what?

 

[cherrybomb]

This may be of interest: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nothingness/

Spoiler

But you should really read the manga and not the netflix adaption:

View attachment 30311

As a general rule, if you have ever had a vague philosophic thought, it is almost certain some loser german nerd has beat you to it. The question of nothingness and whether or not it exists has been argued about for at least 2000 years.

I like the article, thanks for the read.

Also, it is then time to make room for this loser <3

 

[Squid_the_Mighty]

What you have proposed is already something physicists are considering. That existence may have just always been, as opposed to a "big bang." The popular theory that the universe is expanding comes tied to a whole lot. Some believe that the energy fueling that expansion will one day run out or reach equilibrium. It's believed the universe is expanding in the shape of a parabola, or a saddle, a U kinda shape. Which it is said will one day over expand and then begin to collapse upon itself, creating a new Big Bang. However recently it's more commonly thought our universe might be "flat" in which case it very well may expand forever, or until heat death.

The topic is far beyond my surface level understanding but it is interesting.

 

[cherrybomb]

What you have proposed is already something physicists are considering. That existence may have just always been, as opposed to a "big bang." The popular theory that the universe is expanding comes tied to a whole lot. Some believe that the energy fueling that expansion will one day run out or reach equilibrium. It's believed the universe is expanding in the shape of a parabola, or a saddle, a U kinda shape. Which it is said will one day over expand and then begin to collapse upon itself, creating a new Big Bang. However recently it's more commonly thought our universe might be "flat" in which case it very well may expand forever, or until heat death.

The topic is far beyond my surface level understanding but it is interesting.

Hmm, well I think I should become a physicist then, all it took me was one shower to come up with this

 

[s0ren]

Yeah, so what?

That there are always cool books to read on the subject that you should seek out if you're interested in exploring it further

 

[Monseigneur Humilité]

Va-va-voom! Title.

So you know how every philosopher and their mom is wondering when the universe started? When things came into existence? Well what if 'nothing' is just a human concept? What if there never was a beginning, and the universe was always there? Cuz think about it for one second; the universe is expanding, but how can it expand into 'nothing'? Just because life has a cycle of birth and death does not necessarily mean that the universe does.

'Nothing' might simply not exist.

I have come to the current conclusion that there is only one thing that exists and have always done so, and this thing is actually very alive and formless. By being very alive I mean that this thing might have the most freedom to act without constraints and have all possibilities to play out. That includes movement (the way I see it, action and movement are unnegotiable conditions of each other), but actually, this thing does not have to move as a whole towards or from anywhere, because nothing exists outside of it, and therefore there is nothing we could compare it's movement to, or measure any kind of distance by - given that this thing's limits could actually be reached by the means of any individual part of it. But there is movement to be found within it in large portions. Movement is what allows for even thoughts and decision making, as movement is energy, and energy put into a certain framework enables various forms to be created, even if it's for a very short period of time, compared to eternity. Everything else comes from this thing, but nothing is separated from it, although at first glance it might seem that way. This thing is what we also consist of and what makes us up. There is a type of movement (energy-framework) once sparked from a larger and mighter fragment of reality that made way for establishing the ecosystem of the Earth a relatively long time ago, but have also given way for individual intent that had molded it into many forms since then, while keeping it's underlying laws (the framework) to keep it alive still. As to what extent can these laws be abused and stressed, I with a human awareness do not know about yet.

The "mightiest thing's" expansion is not to be measured physically, as for that we need a definitive answer to where the center and the edge of it lies. Both of these attributes are changing constantly (in fact, change is the only constant there is you can count on). There is not a fixed center. All locations within it contain the original blueprint on which they operate on a given layer of reality. And the edge is not strictly round either. It likely has a value and shape it resolves around and comes back to often, but it never remains in the same state. As further dimensions (layers and levels of reality) become created and eliminated simultaneously within the Thing, ripples and waves also appear on the assumed outer layer above them, which then at given location becomes static until further modifications done in the dimension-structure once again. Therefore, expansion is not the only event that is happening, but also reduction, and the two anomaly balance each other, so as a totality the Thing remains stable and firm for further operations done within.

 

[cherrybomb]

I have come to the current conclusion that there is only one thing that exists and have always done so, and this thing is actually very alive and formless. By being very alive I mean that this thing might have the most freedom to act without constraints and have all possibilities to play out. That includes movement (the way I see it, action and movement are unnegotiable conditions of each other), but actually, this thing does not have to move as a whole towards or from anywhere, because nothing exists outside of it, and therefore there is nothing we could compare it's movement to, or measure any kind of distance by - given that this things limits could actually be reached by the means of any individual part of it. But there is movement to be found within it in large portions. Movement is what allows for even thoughts and decision making, as movement is energy, and energy put into a certain framework enables various forms to be created, even if for a very short period of time, compared to eternity. Everything else comes from this thing, but nothing is separated from it, although at first glance it might seem that way. This thing is what we also consist of and makes us up. There is a type of movement (energy-framework) once sparked from a larger and mighter fragment of reality that made way for the establishment of the ecosystem of the Earth a relatively long time ago, but had also given way for individual intent that had molded it into many forms since then, while keeping it's underlying laws (the framework) to keep it alive still. As to what extent can these laws be abused and stressed, I with a human awareness do not know about yet.

The "mightiest thing's" expansion is not to be measured physically, as for that we need a definitive answer to where the center and the edge of it lies. Both of these attributes are changing constantly (in fact, change is the only constant there is you can count on). There is not a fixed center. All locations within It contain the original blueprint on which they operate on a given layer of reality. And the edge is not strictly round either. It likely has a value and shape it resolves around and comes back to often, but it never remains in the same state. As further dimensions (layers and levels of reality) become created and eliminated simultaneously within the Thing, ripples and waves also appear on the assumed outer layer above them, which then at given location becomes static until further modifications done in the dimension-structure once again. Therefore, expansion is not the only event that is happening, but also reduction, and the two anomaly balance each other, so as a totality the Thing remains stable and firm for further operations done within.

But then you can ask yourself the question: is there even a center or an edge if the fabric is infinite? You cannot measure the center of something that has no end nor beginning. It's just there. I honestly think it might be that simple.

Also more generally: I am not a physicist, and while many people already commented that this theory is already something that is being discussed by physicists, I do not think we should feel ourselves incapable of discussing this theory just because we do not have the right credentials.

You never know, you might have been right all along

 

[Monseigneur Humilité]

But then you can ask yourself the question: is there even a center or an edge if the fabric is infinite? You cannot measure the center of something that has no end nor beginning. It's just there. I honestly think it might be that simple.

Also more generally: I am not a physicist, and while many people already commented that this theory is already something that is being discussed by physicists, I do not think we should feel ourselves incapable of discussing this theory just because we do not have the right credentials.

You never know, you might have been right all along

Highly probable. I also often stand on my intuition and how I feel about it when I utter the words. Would any of these possibilities make you uncomfortable though, or is it the unsureness of any of these possibilities being valid, or that you might not point at a strictly scientifically repeatable evidence for any of them? Somehow I get that sense of frustration about something as I read your sentences. But I might be wrong.

 

[Sinthôme]

Too tired to elaborate, but Zero is one of the greatest human inventions. The invention of zero essentially heralded us into civilized history by introducing us into an alphanumeric-symbolic system and is the fundament upon which all of our informational systems (writing and all of our mathematics, proceeding from this: printing, then telegram, telephone, radio, and then Internet / Big Data) stand upon and are constantly oriented by. But what's important in these epochal lurches in our information systems is that with evolution, each advance in human information-communication from the prehistoric dawn of speech, have both directed our rapid neural evolution and been directed by the corresponding neural advancement in a feedback loop. Both acting and acting upon. Homo sapiens brains blossomed with the advent of language, and yes, again, with the advent of Zero that is a pictographical, alphanumeric, and character-based system of writing, which is one and the same cause. The dawn of writing as what initiated us into an illumined history that could be preserved and written down correlated with a massive change in our neural architecture, and it is not hard to intimate how dramatically this probed the workings of the Information-Machine. Spoiler, the Internet will do / is doing the exact same thing. But my main point though about conflating the invention (because it is, a properly philosophical invention) of Zero as a number and working concept and a system of writing which would hereby orient and retie forever the nascent traces in a cave tallying off births and deaths, into a symbolic network of signs that could hold meaning in its web, bringing humans past the veil into a world of real experiential joy, knowing, imagining, pain -- that could be communicated, preserved, and understood. Zero might be equated with God, although as for analogies, it doesn't get much clearer than God as an equal sign =. The idiom has us "re-inventing the wheel" yet the proper saying should be "re-inventing the zero." And well, it's no accident that the wheel and the zero / circle has a toroid or ring shape. In fact, as this guy touches upon,

The popular theory that the universe is expanding comes tied to a whole lot. Some believe that the energy fueling that expansion will one day run out or reach equilibrium. It's believed the universe is expanding in the shape of a parabola, or a saddle, a U kinda shape.

the cosmology of the universe is a fascinating little speculative field within physics, some of which wants to say that the universe is cosmologically shaped as a torus. Anyone familiar with higher level mathematics needs no reminding of the manifold topological significance of this shape. And, well, I suppose I'm writing about the human abstraction of the Zero and its impact on history since I'm no physicist and the question posed seems to be mainly concerned with human abstraction, what can be represented beyond it, if anything, how it correlates with the noumena or 'echt' of the 'real' world-in-itself, and whether the truth of the matter can ever be represented accurately with our human signs so long as we are bound to the world through them. Mmmm, donuts...

 

[Mеченый Яков]

Yeah, so what?

The point is, germans are evil.

 

[Mеченый Яков]

Va-va-voom! Title.

So you know how every philosopher and their mom is wondering when the universe started? When things came into existence? Well what if 'nothing' is just a human concept? What if there never was a beginning, and the universe was always there? Cuz think about it for one second; the universe is expanding, but how can it expand into 'nothing'? Just because life has a cycle of birth and death does not necessarily mean that the universe does.

'Nothing' might simply not exist.

"I am. I am, I exist, I think, therefore I am; I am because I think, why do I think? I don't want to think any more, I am because I think that I don't want to be" "Existence is not something which lets itself be thought of form a distance; it must invade you suddenly, master you, weigh heavily on your heart like a great motionless beast – or else there is nothing at alL"

I suggest you to read about sartre, tbh, i live under the idea of accepting the non-existence as a perpetual medium of shaping your own reality, make the world yours, because if nothing does not exist, then what is the limit about yourself? Reach the heights of your own mind, and choke the construct, embrace the ourboros and live and die for nothing, the meaning is gonna find you eventually.

 

[Mеченый Яков]

Too tired to elaborate, but Zero is one of the greatest human inventions. The invention of zero essentially heralded us into civilized history by introducing us into an alphanumeric-symbolic system and is the fundament upon which all of our informational systems (writing and all of our mathematics, proceeding from this: printing, then telegram, telephone, radio, and then Internet / Big Data) stand upon and are constantly oriented by. But what's important in these epochal lurches in our information systems is that with evolution, each advance in human information-communication from the prehistoric dawn of speech, have both directed our rapid neural evolution and been directed by the corresponding neural advancement in a feedback loop. Both acting and acting upon. Homo sapiens brains blossomed with the advent of language, and yes, again, with the advent of Zero that is a pictographical, alphanumeric, and character-based system of writing, which is one and the same cause. The dawn of writing as what initiated us into an illumined history that could be preserved and written down correlated with a massive change in our neural architecture, and it is not hard to intimate how dramatically this probed the workings of the Information-Machine. Spoiler, the Internet will do / is doing the exact same thing. But my main point though about conflating the invention (because it is, a properly philosophical invention) of Zero as a number and working concept and a system of writing which would hereby orient and retie forever the nascent traces in a cave tallying off births and deaths, into a symbolic network of signs that could hold meaning in its web, bringing humans past the veil into a world of real experiential joy, knowing, imagining, pain. Zero might be equated with God, although as for analogies, it doesn't get much clearer than God as an equal sign =. The idiom has us "re-inventing the wheel" yet the proper saying should be "re-inventing the zero." And well, it's no accident that the wheel and the zero / circle has a toroid or ring shape. In fact, as this guy touches upon,

the cosmology of the universe is a fascinating little speculative field within physics, some of which wants to say that the universe is cosmologically shaped as a torus. Anyone familiar with higher level mathematics needs no reminding of the manifold topological significance of this shape. And, well, I suppose I'm writing about the human abstraction of the Zero and its impact on history since I'm no physicist and the question posed seems to be mainly concerned with human abstraction, what can be represented beyond it, if anything, how it correlates with the noumena or 'echt' of the 'real' world-in-itself, and whether the truth of the matter can ever be represented accurately with our human signs so long as we are bound to the world through them. Mmmm, donuts...

And colonizers called us "Uncivilized" huh.