What is "Nothing"?

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 28 мар 2024
  • Head to squarespace.com/sabine to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code sabine
    This video was inspired by “Levels of Nothing” by Robert Lawrence Kuhn, in the book “The Mystery of Existence: Why is there Anything At All” by John Leslie and Robert Lawrence Kuhn. www.wiley.com/en-us/The+Myste...
    It's also discussed in "Levels of Nothing” by Robert Lawrence Kuhn on Closer To Truth - What is Nothing? • What is Nothing? | Epi...
    💌 Sign up for my weekly science newsletter. It's free! ➜ sabinehossenfelder.com/newsle...
    👉 Support me on Patreon ➜ / sabine
    📖 My new book "Existential Physics" is now on sale ➜ existentialphysics.com/
    🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜
    / @sabinehossenfelder
    00:00 Intro
    01:11 9 Levels of Nothing
    08:55 Was the Universe made form Nothing?
    11:02 Why is there Something Rather than Nothing?
    #physics #philosophy
  • НаукаНаука

Комментарии • 7 тыс.

  • @SabineHossenfelder
    @SabineHossenfelder  Год назад +361

    Hi all! I have a free science newsletter that goes out once per week to which you can subscribe here sabinehossenfelder.com/newsletter/
    If you have a topic for a video to suggest, the best way is to reply to the newsletter. I *do* read as many comments as I can. But, well, it's kind of hard to keep track.

    • @notanemoprog
      @notanemoprog Год назад +14

      Nothing better on a Saturday than a new Sabine video!

    • @therickestrick9951
      @therickestrick9951 Год назад +10

      I like your vids🤩. Plz keep hitting us with the ugly truth about our absurd universe. We want more about the void, the "free will" , the uncertainty principle, our inability to test the big bang theory and of course the impossibility of finding the truth cuz we might be living in a cyclical universe 🤕. Thanks Sabine

    • @Reth_Hard
      @Reth_Hard Год назад +10

      I just want nothing!!
      Is that too much to ask?!

    • @abdeez
      @abdeez Год назад +4

      Much love and appreciation (from Egypt) for all the knowledge you share. Thank you Sabine.

    • @anthonylosego
      @anthonylosego Год назад +5

      You forgot level 10. Sure, you got a level 9 in the box, but the box, you, me, the rest of the universe even is related to "what's in the box" or not in it. It has that relationship just by everything else existing around it. You have to get rid of all that to have true nothing in the box. But then, who would make the RUclips video??? By similar reasoning, your last question on screen, "why is there nothing rather than something?" has the similar issue. You can't ask the question if "nothing" was the current state. You could also ask, "Why does blue?" Similar thought processes. Or the deeper Drax philosophy hidden in GOTG, "Why is Gamora?!" lol

  • @gastronic
    @gastronic Год назад +3216

    Imagine half a million members coming here for nothing.

    • @v3le
      @v3le Год назад +59

      they came here for something that is called "nothing"

    • @SolidSiren
      @SolidSiren Год назад +14

      @@v3le something Cannot be called nothing. Unless it is erroneously referred to as nothing =D

    • @GrouchierThanThou
      @GrouchierThanThou Год назад +30

      @@SolidSiren Everything is something. Nothing is everything , Therefore nothing is something. Logick.

    • @andresdubon2608
      @andresdubon2608 Год назад +16

      @@SolidSiren But something is always being called nothing.
      That's kind of the point of the video.
      All words are concepts that represent reality, all concepts are themselves something and the concept known as "nothing" is therefore something.

    • @KrystelSpicerMindArkLateralThi
      @KrystelSpicerMindArkLateralThi Год назад +2

      ⛓️😉 Nothing is, nothing does? Not to offend, but, this 'alone' & 'jealous', 'always' & 'forever' business love costs us doesn't make sense to your other half. If not the edge of one thing or another, perhaps you not exist? Why do you think men are usually who ask women out? We need reminding. With the 'men having a higher infidelity rate' meaning 'women take more men off of women than vice versa' (& that it be women women should be afraid of & who'll set women free) & what with the relationship you really think is holy being that between you & what male friend of yours .. marriage only being holy by extension as our agreement to you to keep our mits off your friends ..(your now obviously married friends) I'm not sure why else you as men of our own for god knows what reason exist except for your math, which is obviously shoddy.
      It's like you want to grow on us, so our reality become yours like we're male & female angler fish. Like angler fish, we aren't monogamous btw. Never have been, never will. It's that you think we want to be yours no matter whether I can't borrow or ripping the label of our drinks, that we can't tell that every day waking up beside you we feel like we're looking down the barrel of a gun. At nothing.

  • @neino36
    @neino36 Год назад +267

    I understood nothing and I absolutely loved every second of it.

    • @greenworld966
      @greenworld966 Год назад +7

      I love this comment thank you so much for writing it

    • @KuraSourTakanHour
      @KuraSourTakanHour Год назад +12

      There's 2 layers to this comment 😂

    • @Tethloach1
      @Tethloach1 Год назад +1

      chicken or egg? No answer

    • @neino36
      @neino36 Год назад +3

      @@Tethloach1 I'm a firm believer in the chicken.

    • @JT1358
      @JT1358 Год назад

      @@neino36 'But the chickens are not organised!'

  • @The_Hagseed
    @The_Hagseed Год назад +119

    "Like most videos on RUclips, this video is about nothing." That has to be the most accurate thing I've ever heard

    • @harrymoto6951
      @harrymoto6951 Год назад +4

      I had to pause the video until I stopped laughing at that so I wouldn't miss anything! Hilarious, 'cause it's true!

  • @Psychx_
    @Psychx_ Год назад +937

    "Virtual particle pairs are like couples you've never heard of that pop up in your newsfeed, destroy each other and disappear back into nothing, … except with maths" - This one killed me, thanks Sabine!

    • @kintamas4425
      @kintamas4425 Год назад +1

      I thought everything could be explained in terms of intersecting fields, like the Boss-Higgins field?

    • @user-betprolol
      @user-betprolol Год назад

      Are you dead?

    • @DreamingBlindly
      @DreamingBlindly Год назад +4

      Me going into Facebook for the first time in 5 years.

    • @lx4302
      @lx4302 Год назад +3

      wtf I read this as soon as she started speaking through it

    • @oldmandrake
      @oldmandrake Год назад +2

      I was waiting for a big yellow Pac-Man to come (from nothing) and eat the moving dots. lol

  • @hisroyalyeetness281
    @hisroyalyeetness281 Год назад +345

    These jokes being delivered with her somber, straight-faced demeanor is my kind of humor

    • @eklhaft4531
      @eklhaft4531 Год назад +2

      I am falling in love with this channel.

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 Год назад

      Everything (something) is dual to nothing.
      Being is dual to non-being becoming creates becoming -- Plato's cat.
      Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates the converging thesis or synthesis (emergence) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic or Hegel's cat.
      Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition.
      Particles are dual to anti-particles, spin up is dual to spin down -- the Dirac equation.
      Schrodinger's cat is based upon Hegel's or Fichte's cat and they stole it from Plato.
      Duality creates reality.
      The big bang is an infinite negative curvature singularity and Gaussian negative curvature is defined with two dual points -- Janus holes/points:-
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature
      Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry -- non null homotopic.
      "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Synthesis or emergence is created by duality = Janus points.

    • @MikinessAnalog
      @MikinessAnalog Год назад

      Is that not what is known as "deadpan"?

    • @marvinhacking5777
      @marvinhacking5777 Год назад +6

      @@MikinessAnalog She might ride the line of dead pan , but saucy dry is a more accurate description in my view . . . hehe .

    • @marvinhacking5777
      @marvinhacking5777 Год назад

      @@fractalfelt But is it the line of little white lies . Or better known as " Saving someones Feelings " ?
      Sorta like a bonus round when gambling on the outcome of life .

  • @oldmandrake
    @oldmandrake Год назад +41

    Thank You, Sabine, for treating varying philosophies and beliefs with respect, as you in fact continue helping all groups learn more, and even become more excited about science. :)

  • @MrAuswest
    @MrAuswest Год назад +22

    Hi Sabine, Thanks for Nothing!
    Loved your video which helps clarify how little most of us actually know about Nothing even though we may use the term frequently (and frequently inaccurately).
    I've been working on my own personal philosophy working from 'Nothing' and starting on up from there. So, imagine Nothing is ALL there is, no matter, mass, energy, observers, observations, interactions, just limitless, completely empty of everything Nothing. Nothing is the ONLY 'thing' the only one 'thing' (or is that none thing?) This would be indistinguishable from a uniform limitless 'thing' that is constant universally. Nothing then is nothing, one thing and everything, all at the same time. And if that were the true case then we don't exist and we are all just figments of Nothing's imagination - which it could not have as that destroys the concept of no observation or observations etc. Also if Nothing and One thing are indistinguishable from each other there could then be a minimum of two 'things' and we could in theory go on to have an infinite number of 'One Things' that are unlimited by time or distance and none of them would be able to interact with any of the others.
    But what if one thing was the exact opposite of Nothing and for some reason they were inextricably bound together... I wonder what the result might be?

    • @AdamDylanMajor
      @AdamDylanMajor Год назад +1

      Maybe God is the ultimate Nothing that's a barrier against things getting back to Nothing. Rather than creating, Nothing would simply sustain anything and avoid that being equated with it at all costs. I can conceive of a Nothing that fits this idea, which is where you can ask questions but Nothing could give an answer to the questions

  • @theophrastus3.056
    @theophrastus3.056 Год назад +390

    Sabine is the only person I’d tune into to hear about nothing.

    • @mikemondano3624
      @mikemondano3624 Год назад +14

      Many are forced to hear about it from relatives on every major holiday.

    • @crowemagnum1337
      @crowemagnum1337 Год назад +6

      I'd add Michael Stevens to the list. I watched a 40 mins video of his trying to figure out if chairs exist.

    • @theophrastus3.056
      @theophrastus3.056 Год назад +6

      @@crowemagnum1337 I think I’ll sit that one out.

    • @knuthamsun6106
      @knuthamsun6106 Год назад

      @mike I get to listen to it for several hours every day 😃😐😞

    • @-johnny-deep-
      @-johnny-deep- Год назад +4

      Other than Seinfeld. He did a whole series of shows about it!

  • @spurdosparde6130
    @spurdosparde6130 Год назад +192

    this is the cutest thought experiment I've heard in a while, you literally just wanted to give your friend an absolute nothing box to make them happy for their birthday. It might break everything in the universe but atleast you gave your friend what they wanted :)

    • @cliffenyprize8489
      @cliffenyprize8489 Год назад +4

      When you break it down like that, it really is :D

    • @caobita
      @caobita Год назад +5

      Well, they would still get the box though, which is something. But at least now we all know to better not give an "empty" box to someone who wants NOTHING 😂😂😂

    • @enophjimenez1037
      @enophjimenez1037 Год назад +4

      no but then its not.... 'nothing', its still a birthday present, what they wanted. Even tho that shouldn't be possible-

  • @itsmootdamnitnotmute905
    @itsmootdamnitnotmute905 Год назад +11

    Love your channel, your content and the honest delivery spiced with dry humour Sabine. I remember a period in the '80s when physics and eastern philosophy/religion started dating. (I think) Fritjof Capra started it with 'The Tao of Physics'. There were others as well such as Gary Zukav's "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" . Books such as these were generally entertaining/thoughtful without going too von Daniken in how they presented their material. This reminded me how much I enjoyed the intersection of physics and philosophy.

  • @MLHunt
    @MLHunt Год назад +8

    As someone who has occasionally felt compelled to read a bit into ontology, this was one of the most interesting explorations of this subject I've encountered.

  • @seanp6417
    @seanp6417 Год назад +156

    Pulling so much content from nothing is really something. Keep up the great work!

    • @mj7335
      @mj7335 Год назад +6

      Once upon a time it was called fantasie and imagination. No it's called science.

    • @TeaParty1776
      @TeaParty1776 Год назад +2

      @@mj7335 Exactly. See The Logical Leap by David Harriman. Science is basically induction from conceptualized perceptions of concretes, not deductions based on the arbitrary.

    • @littlefluffybushbaby7256
      @littlefluffybushbaby7256 Год назад +2

      Doh! Something from nothing. Wish I'd said that.

  • @mike42441
    @mike42441 Год назад +285

    It's amazing that Sabine has the ability to make us think very deeply about nothing at all. Now that, is something!

    • @PlatonicPluto
      @PlatonicPluto Год назад +13

      *NO... NO.. NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!*

    • @capcompass9298
      @capcompass9298 Год назад +4

      @@PlatonicPluto Next video - "Paradox".

    • @blueskies792
      @blueskies792 Год назад +1

      Something from nothing and nothing is free.

    • @PanDiaxik
      @PanDiaxik Год назад +3

      @@blueskies792 Nothing isn't free. It's pretty expensive co create 17th century vacuum, let alone level 9 nothing

    • @capcompass9298
      @capcompass9298 Год назад +3

      @@blueskies792 Dire Staits.

  • @vinceturner3863
    @vinceturner3863 Год назад +3

    Thanks Sabine. You explain very deep and complex things with clarity and an infectious energy!

  • @Solarizzin
    @Solarizzin Год назад +11

    You did a really good job of explaining it, you broke down every concept and made it easier for some to understand.
    "True nothing" is the absence of all concepts and possibilities, therefore "nothing" will never exist, and there will always be something, there is no conceivable possibilities that allow "nothing" to exist.

  • @johnrendle1303
    @johnrendle1303 Год назад +349

    Sabine is getting better and better- hilariously scientific and scientifically hilarious. Don’t you just love her! She’s fabulous. This video on nothing must be one of her best ones.

    • @PraiseDog
      @PraiseDog Год назад +5

      I feel the opposite. She used to display a little dry humor which I liked. Now she has joined the legion who build the presentations around a comedy routine. I doubt it is her doing. I find it distracting and annoying. Modern audiences are like little children I guess, you need to entertain them to get them to listen.

    • @coloradoing9172
      @coloradoing9172 Год назад +3

      @@PraiseDog Ha. Disabling the likes in your own crappy videos. Show some integrity, buddy.

    • @lindayoung58
      @lindayoung58 Год назад +2

      @@PraiseDog ... Say what?

    • @capcompass9298
      @capcompass9298 Год назад

      @@PraiseDog Science is seriously SERIOUS!
      Science is the art of Measuration. If it can't be measured, it's not SCIENTIFIC.
      How does one measure humour?
      As a teacher, I have often found that light humour can enlighten not just children, but also those of any age without understanding or even interest in a subject much easier than 2,000 pages. LIGHTen up.

    • @youfoundityoufoundit6675
      @youfoundityoufoundit6675 3 месяца назад

      ​@@capcompass9298Some levels of science can only be done by ghosts at the time.

  • @markignatovich3379
    @markignatovich3379 Год назад +166

    I spent half of the video laughing. Both at the non-chalant delivery of humor, and the absolutely absurd directions I would never have imagined going myself. I mean that as compliment - she kept subverting my expectations all I could do was enjoy the ride. Brilliant combination of education and entertainment.

    • @kevincleary627
      @kevincleary627 Год назад +2

      I enjoyed the eloquence of your and other comments almost as much as the video.

  • @TrodeVanityNetwork
    @TrodeVanityNetwork Год назад +10

    Hello Sabine. This is by far one my favorite episodes. Thank you. I've had an idea rattling around my brain for a couple of decades now, that this episode seems to validate in some fashion. My thought experiment suggests that when you have nothing, you are left with nothing but possibility. I think you said as much also. Then I wondered if in the absence of time, presumably the condition prior to the big bang, if an "infinite amount of time" is actually indistinguishable from "instantaneousness." If we could agree on that, then given just the possibility of a particle popping into existence out of nothing would be a 100 percent surety since all other possibilities (like nothing happening at all for instance) will have been exhausted -- throughout an infinite eternity of nothing happening having played itself out. In my mind, the instant "nothingness" is achieved somehow, "somethingness" must instantaneously show up to fill the void. I'd love to hear some future thoughts that explore this further. ps. Love your videos. Alles gute, Uwe

    • @laruewmirando
      @laruewmirando 8 месяцев назад

      Hello Uwe, Thank you for sharing your thought experiment and describing it so succinctly as wondering “if an infinite amount of time is indistinguishable from instantaneous.” I’ve likewise wondered about this for many years and keep feeling like it leads to interesting possibilities. Perhaps we could mull it over if there is a way to connect. All the best, William

    • @anonsurfer
      @anonsurfer 3 месяца назад

      NOTHING and EVERYTHING exist simultaneously, just as E = M.
      We can ask if the number 0 is a true nothing or is it the nothing that comprises everything (infinity) and thereby remains in equilibrium. 0 manifesting as all possibilities, including their opposites (matter, anti-matter)
      In such a scenario, the Many Worlds Interpretation seems more plausible, as the probability becomes 1/infinity, which mathematically is not meaningful, but appears to illustrate that every moment can branch out in innumerable ways, and the sum of all such moments/worlds lead to equilibrium.
      Time is also an illusion in this framework from the vantage point of the 0, because no change is happening, and everything happens simultaneously. Like if a 0 splits itself into a -1 and a +1, there is no change and therefore no passage of time. The various moments/facets of existence of anything/particle/life-form etc. are akin to different numbers that are already inside the zero and balanced by their opposite counterparts.

  • @hannahschneyder6651
    @hannahschneyder6651 Год назад +4

    I've been binging your channel since I've discovered it a few days ago. I love how you give every idea a fair chance! I also have a subject request: would you be interested in covering the idea of "Elektrosmog"? Somebody I know claims to be very sensitive to it, and I am sceptical about the whole concept (not her symptoms, but the way she attributes them to electromagnetic pollution or whatever). But since I've watched your video on 5G, I think that maybe I shouldn't dismiss her idea off-hand.

  • @jcantonelli1
    @jcantonelli1 Год назад +356

    The paradox that keeps me up at night isn't the notion of nothing, but rather how Sabine can be so ordinary in her delivery, and yet produce such engaging content at the same time.
    (I promise this is a compliment, haha - great video!)

    • @scottschmit4274
      @scottschmit4274 Год назад +4

      I was thinking about that and it would super neat to see out takes of her breaking character.

    • @jamieg2427
      @jamieg2427 Год назад +11

      dead pan humor is a real talent 🤣

    • @nadie887
      @nadie887 Год назад +2

      it's a video about nothing

    • @stevepittman3770
      @stevepittman3770 Год назад +3

      It's that low-key sense of humor that does it for me.

    • @capcompass9298
      @capcompass9298 Год назад +1

      This is possibly one of the funniest science videos I have watched (and not a smile).
      Next video "The Infinities of Infinity".
      If you turn Infinity into a fraction (one over infinity) there is/are infinity fractions between each whole number. How say you?

  • @masonshihab6799
    @masonshihab6799 Год назад +122

    4:15 -- the best part of Sabine's humor is that it is as on point as it is unexpected

    • @ufodeath
      @ufodeath Год назад +8

      I saw nothing

    • @joschemd
      @joschemd Год назад +4

      Well that's something..

    • @michaelhoste_
      @michaelhoste_ Год назад +1

      I want to start telling ppl that it's 'en pointe' not 'on point'. One down, 7 billion to go.

    • @michaelhoste_
      @michaelhoste_ Год назад

      @Sinna It's still 'en pointe'. (Two down, 7 billion to go).

    • @Josh-xp9iy
      @Josh-xp9iy Год назад

      She’s a savage 😭💀

  • @Voss4Congress
    @Voss4Congress Год назад +1

    Thank you for posting this. I think a deep dive is needed into “nothing”.

  • @ramabommaraju2715
    @ramabommaraju2715 11 месяцев назад +1

    This is your best work! Very original

  • @JanBruunAndersen
    @JanBruunAndersen Год назад +30

    Promises by politicians surely counts as nothing - on so many levels.

    • @jonadams8841
      @jonadams8841 Год назад +3

      That’s a whole new dimension of nothing.

    • @Anonymous-df8it
      @Anonymous-df8it Год назад +2

      Level 69 nothing is Level 9 nothing + politician promises

  • @neilgerace355
    @neilgerace355 Год назад +46

    12:56 All I can think of is the anthropic principle: if there were nothing, we wouldn't be here to ask "Why is there something?"

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 Год назад

      Everything (something) is dual to nothing.
      Being is dual to non-being becoming creates becoming -- Plato's cat.
      Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates the converging thesis or synthesis (emergence) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic or Hegel's cat.
      Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition.
      Particles are dual to anti-particles, spin up is dual to spin down -- the Dirac equation.
      Schrodinger's cat is based upon Hegel's or Fichte's cat and they stole it from Plato.
      Duality creates reality.
      The big bang is an infinite negative curvature singularity and Gaussian negative curvature is defined with two dual points -- Janus holes/points:-
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature
      Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry -- non null homotopic.
      "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Synthesis or emergence is created by duality = Janus points.

    • @duprie37
      @duprie37 Год назад

      There can only always already have been something, just because nothing cannot ever be. The only being that truly comes from nothing, is that being which is never what it is: namely yourself as pure subject.

    • @CaptainMisery86
      @CaptainMisery86 Год назад

      @@duprie37 nah dog, at some point for some amount of time there was literally nothing in all directions forever.

    • @JustScrapHD
      @JustScrapHD Год назад +2

      @@CaptainMisery86 If there still was "time", then it wasnt truly nothing. If there was literally nothing, nothing could come to exist.

    • @alexgonzo5508
      @alexgonzo5508 Год назад +1

      Since there is something, we are here to ask "Why isn't there nothing". The anthropic principle doesn't answer the question why, or how, just that it is so that things exist including ourselves.

  • @darylmarsden6454
    @darylmarsden6454 Год назад +4

    I have watched a few of Sabine's videos and they all make me laugh, I like her sense of humour; at 8:34 this one cracked me up. I also agree that something cannot come from nothing and how can we trust scientists who come up with incomprehensible formulas. Thank you, Sabine, for presenting information in an understandable way.

    • @Cheepchipsable
      @Cheepchipsable Год назад

      I can see that clip coming up on Apologist channels - "Even a scientist says you can't trust other scientists!"

    • @godfreydebouillon8807
      @godfreydebouillon8807 Год назад

      @@Cheepchipsable Of course you can't trust scientists, unless they're also experts in every other field like epistemology, modal logic, philosophy etc etc.
      A "scientist" who doesn't understand the difference between Inductive methods of science, where large, randomized, controlled samples with experimentation that can be repeated at will; and the other things they ramble on about, pertaining to abductive reasoning, that can never be repeated, like infinite parallel universes, multiverse, conditions prior to expansion, the definition of "nothing", and so much more, they literally have no idea what they are saying (a vast majority of the time), needs to say a lot less on such subjects.
      They're trying to deduce such explanations into existence, just as apologists do for God, except that apologists rely on things like good metaphysics, modal and propositional logic, whereas a vast majority of "scientists" don't even know what they are (nor do they need to, if they'd stick to their jobs, instead of making silly annunciations pertaining to things like philosophy and religion).

  • @RasmusMolck
    @RasmusMolck Год назад +26

    There is still something in the box: the 9th level of nothing is in the box. They said they wanted nothing for their birthday but you gave them something that has at least a definition. We can talk about it so clearly it is something :)

    • @simev500
      @simev500 Год назад +1

      Is that how nothing becomes something?😏
      P.S. I might also like to add 'something' here, with credit due to the original posting that sprouted this philosophical musing.
      Isn't level 9 part of the Eisenberg Uncertainty eternal postulate, that the very act of communicating the idea of nothing makes that nothing a something, notwithstanding the use of semantics?

    • @randomnobody660
      @randomnobody660 Год назад +8

      I mean what you are describing would fit into the platonic ideal of 'nothing' and thus be removed at lv8. The fact that we still talk about the idea of it being nothing despite the deliberate stipulation that such ideas be removed is imo just a limitation of either human thoughts in general or english in particular, or maybe it's just my personal lack of imagination.
      Either way, you shouldn't be able to talk about the emptiness of a lv8 box, and possibly shouldn't be able to even entertain the idea of a lv9 box containing anything. This all sounds very weird, but then again lv3 empty boxes are probably already physically impossible.

    • @3rdPartyIntervener
      @3rdPartyIntervener 10 месяцев назад

      well, to be pedantic, you're getting a BOX, and that's "something".

    • @JeffLearman
      @JeffLearman 9 месяцев назад +3

      No, that got removed in step 8. Note that step 8 requires the annihilation of all reality. Happy Birthday!

    • @jeorgeramirezgonzolezsanti3178
      @jeorgeramirezgonzolezsanti3178 4 месяца назад

      Only one being knows what true nothing is.

  • @saadmanomar7754
    @saadmanomar7754 Год назад +94

    Video: "Nothing"
    90k people: "Hmm, interesting."

    • @Cyberplayer5
      @Cyberplayer5 Год назад +4

      Well that nothing escalated quickly.😁

    • @kamranahmad4592
      @kamranahmad4592 Год назад +1

      Seinfeld: I already did that

    • @stylis666
      @stylis666 Год назад

      @@Cyberplayer5 My guess is that is how the universe arose. Keep in mind it's a guess, not a belief.

  • @fredygump5578
    @fredygump5578 Год назад +41

    The box needs a big warning: Always think OUTSIDE the box. To think inside the box would ruin it.

    • @AdrianBoyko
      @AdrianBoyko Год назад +4

      But the box has no “inside”

    • @k1ng5urfer
      @k1ng5urfer Год назад +2

      Brilliant

    • @fredygump5578
      @fredygump5578 Год назад

      @@AdrianBoyko If that's true, how can it be a box? Example: If you have a steel cube that you say is a box that doesn't have an "inside", then the material the box is made out of becomes the thing that is inside the box.

    • @scambammer6102
      @scambammer6102 Год назад +2

      @spaz what box?

    • @EnRaye
      @EnRaye Год назад

      @@SG2048-meta .

  • @dalphon987
    @dalphon987 Год назад +1

    you are a great teacher, you make simplify a very complex idea.

  • @yourself88xbl
    @yourself88xbl Год назад +3

    I remember taking acid and on the come up remembering a conversation about the wetness of water with my brother in law. This led me to a completely different understanding about what nothing might be or not be.

  • @clownpendotfart
    @clownpendotfart Год назад +33

    Steve Pinker's favorite joke goes as follows. The student asks the teacher "Why is there something rather than nothing?" The teacher responds, "Ah, even if there wasn't you still wouldn't be satisfied."

  • @jayd8935
    @jayd8935 Год назад +51

    Even a level 9 box of nothing would soon have a cat jumping into it. Unless it was dead.

    • @ChadWilson
      @ChadWilson Год назад +3

      At that level of nothing, the cat wouldn't even know there was a nothing to jump into, dead or alive.

    • @huberbauer2001
      @huberbauer2001 Год назад

      Ha ha 😂 you must be a physicist (scholar from Schrödinger) - good comment 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

    • @cookieDaXapper
      @cookieDaXapper Год назад +2

      ......isn't that resolved at five or six???

    • @Eliphas_Leary
      @Eliphas_Leary Год назад +1

      Mayhaps that box would have infinite cats in it, some of them dead.

    • @ChadWilson
      @ChadWilson Год назад +1

      @@Eliphas_Leary, but, if it contains something, even possibilities of the set containing 🐈, both dead 💀, dead/alive, and alive, it loses levels of nothing?

  • @baileescott401
    @baileescott401 Год назад

    SO MANY IDEAS i love this channel, videos never disappoint

  • @cheesofile666
    @cheesofile666 Год назад

    This video is a goldmine. Thanks Sabine!

  • @MuratIsikHome
    @MuratIsikHome Год назад +104

    Like many others, I got to know Sabine with her book “Lost in Math”. Since then, she is a value in my life.
    This discussion about 9 levels of nothing reminds me of the opening sentence of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s masterpiece Tractatus: “The world is everything that is the case”. I am a mortal bookworm with a computer science degree, not a philosopher. Here is my subjective interpretation of the sentence and connection to the discussion.
    By “the world”, Wittgenstein actually refers to the whole universe. I understand this sentence somewhat as: “Anything that we can say is limited to be about this universe”, in a more open form: “The expressive power of human language is specific and limited to express facts about this universe.”
    I think anything beyond Level 5 is beyond the expressive power of human language, whose origin is our universe full of things, and designed to talk about things. It does not mean that we cannot construct sentences about these concepts, but it means that the meaning conveyed by these sentences will have to be distorted just as an irregular piece of glass distorts the image behind.
    Even Level 5 is problematic. Look at the sentence “Sometimes virtual particles can become real” at 5:17. As you would think deeper and deeper on the definitions of “real”, “virtual”, “become”, “can” and “sometimes”, you may notice the distortion introduced by the lens of language.
    Almost certainly, we cannot construct a sentence about a place where “there are no laws of nature”, and expect it to be free of problems.
    I personally think a lot of language distortion is similarly the main cause of why we see the sub-atomic quantum world “weird”. In describing the double slit experiment, for instance, we often talk about the “poor” electron trying to “decide” which slit to pass through, and then with not enough time to decide, it goes through both at the same time. Clearly, the language and its constituent metaphors, evolved to express facts about universe at our human scale is introducing distortion.
    I am grateful to you Sabine for the thought provoking episode, you have a visible impact.

    • @ahmetaksit8923
      @ahmetaksit8923 Год назад +3

      Distortion introduced by the lens of langıage... 🤔🤔🤔
      👍

    • @Untoldanimations
      @Untoldanimations Год назад +2

      I also immediately thought of Wittgenstein when we started talking about the lack of mind to conceptualise the box

    • @JoniWan77
      @JoniWan77 Год назад +5

      If you want to go further, modern language is simply a distortion of old language, with ancient words getting distorted into similar metaphors, which become dead and then simply describe abstract concepts or new objects. So when you speak about distortion introduced by the lense of language, you have to question way more than one would usually like to question and it is certainly not limited to concepts outside this universe. I'd also argue Wittgenstein is probably not referring to language distortion. We already have to distort our language quite a lot to explain and grasp things very much "being the case". And after a while we do not recognize a former distortion as a distortion anymore.

    • @tyyamnitz8408
      @tyyamnitz8408 Год назад +4

      You raised some thought provoking ideas thank you! I see it in a similar way it I don’t think language is the limiting factor but instead intelligence. Much like animals could never understand the universe in the way humans can we are incapable of understanding concepts that are beyond our universe. Even if we found a way to increase our intelligence or ascend to a higher level of understanding or awareness, intelligence itself is still a concept from within our universe

    • @ghost_of_jah5210
      @ghost_of_jah5210 Год назад +1

      “The world” is all of reality, not just our universe. As far as I know at least, I’ve heard it used in a couple philosophical arguments and defined as such.

  • @jeffneptune2922
    @jeffneptune2922 Год назад +74

    I love how she puts down physicists and cosmologists that try to get away with creating a universe out of nothing, but not really NOTHING.

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 Год назад +1

      Everything (something) is dual to nothing.
      Being is dual to non-being becoming creates becoming -- Plato's cat.
      Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates the converging thesis or synthesis (emergence) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic or Hegel's cat.
      Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition.
      Particles are dual to anti-particles, spin up is dual to spin down -- the Dirac equation.
      Schrodinger's cat is based upon Hegel's or Fichte's cat and they stole it from Plato.
      Duality creates reality.
      The big bang is an infinite negative curvature singularity and Gaussian negative curvature is defined with two dual points -- Janus holes/points:-
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature
      Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry -- non null homotopic.
      "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Synthesis or emergence is created by duality = Janus points.

    • @jayrathjen1127
      @jayrathjen1127 Год назад +3

      @@hyperduality2838 The dualism is what we need to think beyond. We have hit a wall of understanding

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 Год назад +2

      @@jayrathjen1127 Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
      Relax dude I am hitting you with the 4th law of thermodynamics!
      "Entropy is a measure of randomness" -- Roger Penrose.
      Syntropy is a measure of order.
      Randomness (entropy, uncertainty) is dual to order (syntropy, certainty).
      Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle.
      From a converging, convex (lens) or syntropic perspective everything looks divergent, concave or entropic -- the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
      All observers have a syntropic perspective according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
      My syntropy is your entropy and your syntropy is my entropy -- duality!
      Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
      Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy).
      Mind (the internal soul, syntropy) is dual to matter (the external soul, entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line.
      There are patterns of duality hardwired into physics, mathematics & philosophy.
      Schrodinger's cat is based upon Hegelian philosophy or metaphysics but the books do not tell you that.
      Bosons (symmetric wave functions, waves) are dual to Fermions (anti-symmetric wave functions, particles) -- wave/particle or quantum duality.
      Bosons are dual to Fermions -- atomic duality.
      You and your mind are built form atoms hence duality.
      Energy is duality, duality is energy.
      Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
      Dark matter is dual to dark energy.
      That is the good news.
      Good news is dual to bad news.
      The bad news is that main stream physics is currently dominated by materialists or teleophobia.
      Teleophilia is dual to teleophobia.
      Signals (patterns, order, predictability, syntropy) are dual to noise (randomness, unpredictability, entropy).
      "The brain is a prediction machine" -- Karl Friston, neuroscientist.
      Making predictions to track, targets, goals and objectives is a syntropic process -- teleological.
      There is a dual process to that of increasing entropy namely syntropy.
      Syntropic processes are dual to entropic processes.

    • @stylis666
      @stylis666 Год назад +2

      @@hyperduality2838 And orange isn't dual to red, so please stuff it. Your useless duality is useless, which is dual to useful in all it's degrees of usefulness, which you lack.

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 Год назад

      @@stylis666 Colours are actually dual -- electro-magnetic energy.
      Duality leads to the 4th law of thermodynamics! Your comment is asinine.

  • @CrazyGaming-ig6qq
    @CrazyGaming-ig6qq 11 месяцев назад +2

    I never understood anything but now I finally understand nothing, thank you!

  • @lancethrustworthy
    @lancethrustworthy Год назад +1

    Loved your 3 answer recap. You're hired.

  • @flockofwingeddoors
    @flockofwingeddoors Год назад +27

    Love seeing Lost in Math on my shelf, and your videos in my feed.
    Your works are valuable, and as a physics student, I find your content inspiring! Keep up the amazing work.

  • @bonedaddy4670
    @bonedaddy4670 Год назад +80

    This is like a Seinfeld episode, it’s a story about nothing. We all know how well that went!

    • @crawnorris97
      @crawnorris97 Год назад +2

      That was just a fancy marketing phrase, in order to make it seem extra funny or "special". It wasn't unique though because Seinfeld was just a situational comedy, and all sit comedies were/are about nothing. Lavern & Shirley, two broke girls, three's company, etc, etc, they all were about nothing, no main plots here.

    • @michaelsmith4904
      @michaelsmith4904 Год назад +3

      Ended up in jail for, uh.. doing nothing?

    • @nadamuchu
      @nadamuchu Год назад

      Just a friendly reminder that Seinfeld groomed a kid and everyone was fine with it.

    • @t.c.bramblett617
      @t.c.bramblett617 Год назад

      Pretty well I'd say

    • @HxTurtle
      @HxTurtle Год назад

      @Evi1 M4chine and I believe it's impossible to read especially your second part without immediately thinking, "but that's Trump politics, basically .. isn't it?"

  • @jacegarcia5029
    @jacegarcia5029 Год назад

    Recently found this channel and I am in LOVE!

  • @Rylan_The_Scarecrow
    @Rylan_The_Scarecrow Год назад

    Man, the dry humor here is fantastic. That and the sciencey bit together are just the knees of the bees. 🥰

  • @ReclinedPhysicist
    @ReclinedPhysicist Год назад +64

    The 10th level of nothing is Sergeant Schultz, "I know nothing, NOTHING."

    • @C64SX
      @C64SX Год назад +5

      Or Manuel ruclips.net/video/nX7CeTXoxyU/видео.html

    • @yt.personal.identification
      @yt.personal.identification Год назад +3

      11th...no box

    • @Littleprinceleon
      @Littleprinceleon Год назад +1

      12th: ...
      ... No comment!

    • @MrWildbill
      @MrWildbill Год назад +1

      I wonder if Germans consider Hogan's Hero's as offensive?

    • @tomamberg5361
      @tomamberg5361 Год назад

      @@MrWildbill My dad absolutely thought Hogan's Heros was offensive. He was born in Germany in 1935, and his father - my Opa - was sent to die in the Eastern Front for the crime of meeting with others in a church basement. He thought a TV sit-com about living under Nazi rule was beyond belief, and it was forbidden in our house. Nazis were never anything to be taken lightly.

  • @nothingg8157
    @nothingg8157 Год назад +6

    Finally a video about me.
    I love your time spent on the philosophical aspect of a lot of your topics. Theoretical science without philosophy is like cooking without the intent of eating.

  • @iAmNothingness
    @iAmNothingness Год назад

    I just found your channel today and holy moly you have good videos!
    Your English is also easy to listen to since mine is bad.

  • @Rippinsteo2916
    @Rippinsteo2916 2 месяца назад +1

    Gives new meaning to the phrase, “Nothing really matters.”

  • @bkbland1626
    @bkbland1626 Год назад +75

    She has the greatest sly jokes.

    • @davidbrown1005
      @davidbrown1005 Год назад

      @Bianca Arlette By following trades do you mean copying her trades,as its done in etoro? Are you giving her your money or the money stays on your account? I have heard about copying trades but have not looked into it but I have an idea of what it is.

    • @georgewilliam9978
      @georgewilliam9978 Год назад

      @Bianca Arlette I'm glad you advised to look her name online to see her portfolio,this is very important, making your own research is very essential. Thank you so much.

    • @jakecaldwell3619
      @jakecaldwell3619 Год назад

      This is a great info, I remember my friends calling me crazy when i started investing in digital assets, now i shut them up with the current growth.

    • @notanemoprog
      @notanemoprog Год назад

      @Zilla Haha, yeah, it's amazing how these scammers are using bots and their fake conversations on Sabine's video, as if they want to prove A.I. has passed the Turing test...but of course they fail BIGLY

  • @KenBruceWayne
    @KenBruceWayne Год назад +23

    Interesting and funny. That was worth subscribing. Thanks for the videos

  • @gerrywood
    @gerrywood Год назад +6

    I remember reading Jean Paul Sartre's Being and Nothingness and he states that nothing cannot be, by definition. He describes some of the ideas you put forth.

    • @abirdthatflew
      @abirdthatflew Год назад +1

      Correct. If attention is drawn to nothing, it automatically comes into existence and becomes something.

    • @JeffLearman
      @JeffLearman 9 месяцев назад

      My answer to that is, that given that there is anything, then nothingness is absurd. But, if there were nothing, then anything would be absurd. My belief is that the fact that anything exists is absurd, so there's no point explaining why it does.

  • @ArunJacob_AJVGlobal
    @ArunJacob_AJVGlobal 3 месяца назад +1

    AMAZING!! Thank you.

  • @photorealm
    @photorealm Год назад +56

    I love this video. I tried to imagine nothing once but I couldn't do it. Same with infinity.

    • @stylis666
      @stylis666 Год назад +2

      Try meditating, it's the easiest way to imagine nothing :p And for infinity you can just start small and go from there. Instead of making infinity big, you keep dividing an arbitrary imagined number. Physically that will have a barrier, but in maths you can just have infinite numbers between 1 and 2 and between every two numbers you put there you can put another infinity of numbers that keep getting smaller and smaller and then you have an infinity within an infinity.
      Or here's a way to imagine both at the same time, an infinity and absolute nothing:
      Imagine what people do. You know, stuff like singing, walking, falling on their asses, baking a cake, saying hi or giving a compliment.
      Now compare that to what all gods have ever done: nothing.
      Now compare infinite gods doing what they do to you giving one person a smile to make them feel better: nothing from infinite gods and you did infinitely more than all gods combined ever did in the history of existence. See how easy that was?

    • @Unethical.Dodgson
      @Unethical.Dodgson Год назад +3

      @@stylis666 Your comment really was a load of shower thoughts until the last two paragraphs. Those were just facts.

    • @KhallDrake
      @KhallDrake Год назад +6

      I feel like nothing and infinity are closely related. Nothing is an infinite lack of something.

    • @effedrien
      @effedrien Год назад +6

      It is not because of a limitation of your brain that you couldn't imagine those things. It is because you tried to imagine something which cannot exist.

    • @miguelheat
      @miguelheat Год назад

      @@KhallDrake nice one

  • @bastianbruckner8611
    @bastianbruckner8611 Год назад +74

    "I really think people are way too respectful of all the stuff physicist make up and get away with, just because their maths is incomprehenseable" Hut ab für dieses ehrliche Geständnis einer Wissenschaftlerin

    • @JoniWan77
      @JoniWan77 Год назад +20

      It really feels like physicists just become philosophers at that point, with all methodological problems of philosophy attached. But instead of using language, they are using math, which may make their findings even less useful ironically.

    • @matthewtaylor6533
      @matthewtaylor6533 Год назад +1

      Incomprehensible

    • @thomaskilroy3199
      @thomaskilroy3199 Год назад +1

      @JoniWan77 as an aspiring philosopher I would agree with you, but I would caveat that the ‘methodological problems’ in philosophy are intractable.
      Recommend looking into ‘the criterion problem’.
      Basically it notices that it is by an implicit philosophy of epistemology that we decide any methodology to be ‘good’.
      What you evaluate as a ‘problem’ in a methodology will be based on a particular set of axioms, but accounting for these axioms is it’s own identical evaluation problem, and there is simply no obvious way to close that hole in a worldview.

    • @JoniWan77
      @JoniWan77 Год назад +1

      @@thomaskilroy3199 Problem may have been the wrong word. I am myself a student of literature. I simply believe it is important to be aware of one's methodology and how it impacts your findings. The methods of a humanities scholar for example lead to findings, which are very different in nature than those of a scientist. Especially scientists and to a degree economics scholars seem to not be aware of the differences most of the time, which makes their own dealings with similar methodology seem a tad naive and arrogant at the same time in my experience.

    • @thomaskilroy3199
      @thomaskilroy3199 Год назад

      @JoniWan77 yes I agree, though it is not always arrogance, but different fields do often forget how to make each other’s methodologies talk to each other.

  • @Voreoptera
    @Voreoptera Год назад +1

    I do not know if you were trying to be funny, but it was funny. Instead of saying this is what happened, you said this is our hypothesis and we do not know. Really good way to explain science.

  • @frogsframes
    @frogsframes Год назад +1

    At least you made me laugh Sabine! I remember a line from Ionesco's Macbett which went roughly "its not nothing, its something".
    The nothing you discuss is not nothing itself, it is a thought held by something which holds concepts e.g. mind, consciousness, a biological brain. The concept is not the thing itself, it is a model of a thing, defined by conceiving of the absence of the somethings by which the mind accounts for sensation.
    So the nine levels of nothing reflect nine levels in the way we explain something and thus show us something about the way we think.

    • @philipc8411
      @philipc8411 10 месяцев назад

      Thus before conception and after death?

  • @georgebernstein12
    @georgebernstein12 Год назад +7

    I’ve been a big fan of closer to truth for years. I’m glad to see She’s interested in his thoughts, ideas, and questions as well. She’s so awesome

    • @jareknowak8712
      @jareknowak8712 Год назад

      She was at CTT recently.

    • @georgebernstein12
      @georgebernstein12 Год назад

      @@jareknowak8712 sweet I’ll Mosdef check that out soon. Thx! For t he headz up

  • @Goodmanperson55
    @Goodmanperson55 Год назад +43

    Amazingly in-depth analysis of Seinfeld

    • @nate_d376
      @nate_d376 Год назад

      What's the deal with all this nothing? Lol

  • @cheeseheadfiddle
    @cheeseheadfiddle Год назад

    Sabine, you are most definitely a philosopher. Don’t take that the wrong way! Highest compliment.
    You’re a comedian as well. Also a compliment.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 Год назад

      Yes, she is all of that. What she is not is a good physicist. ;-)

    • @cheeseheadfiddle
      @cheeseheadfiddle Год назад

      @@schmetterling4477 In what respect? Curious.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 Год назад

      @@cheeseheadfiddle Read her papers. You will have a good laugh. :-)

  • @Nilicha
    @Nilicha Год назад +14

    Very enlightening. Thank you for "nothing". 😁
    I am a regular viewer of your channel, and it's getting better and better (just like expanding universe). Thank you.

  • @josephmartino9958
    @josephmartino9958 Год назад +6

    I started thinking about nothing over 60 years ago, I'm happy to know it is something. Thank you Sabine for taking the time to go somewhere out of the box with your your take on this invisible, place holding subject...

  • @lemonskull5742
    @lemonskull5742 Год назад

    Great sense of humor. Sounds like perfectly done for me.

  • @danielvarga_p
    @danielvarga_p Год назад

    This is really important thank you very much!

  • @vincentlevalois
    @vincentlevalois Год назад +6

    I LOVE this video Sabine. Brilliance, logic, humor, everything that makes for an excellent teaching video and nothing we don't need. 😉

  • @anthonyrobertson2011
    @anthonyrobertson2011 Год назад +4

    I heard someone say once "when has someone ever observed a nothing to know it's possible or how it works?". I'm now not convinced nothing was ever a thing, but I did use to buy into the concept.

  • @kendrickjobe2149
    @kendrickjobe2149 Год назад

    This is beautiful 😯. You have yourself another subscriber. GR8 content.

  • @ukopia7743
    @ukopia7743 9 месяцев назад

    Wonderful video! My own theory is that nothing and everything exist simultaneously in a universe/void that in effect toggles constantly on an infinitismal scale. There is nothing, there is something, all at the same time.

  • @myssree1
    @myssree1 Год назад +9

    Remaining solemn and serious all through and yet make every word funny is a rare talent ❤️

    • @Red0Sonja
      @Red0Sonja Год назад

      This talent is usually reserved for those of British persuation...

  • @2Sor2Fig
    @2Sor2Fig Год назад +30

    5:48 - That joke was totally worth it.

    • @patrickhawley1392
      @patrickhawley1392 Год назад +5

      Except that she, like most people, got the quote wrong. It should be: "The love of money is the root of all evil."

    • @leechild4655
      @leechild4655 Год назад

      5:50 lmao🤣

  • @logicbug
    @logicbug 9 месяцев назад

    Thank you for a great video. I have nothing to add.

  • @ugxsan
    @ugxsan Год назад

    I don't know how to explain it, but the understanding that true nothingness is so difficult to create--or... conceptualize?--is somehow very comforting for me.

  • @EXQCmoi
    @EXQCmoi Год назад +12

    This is one of the funniest episodes. Already at level 2 I felt this 'nothing' is gonna cost me a lot.

  • @milesd9556
    @milesd9556 Год назад +13

    In these times I get closer and closer to the definition of nothing with each new bank statement...

  • @Viperzka
    @Viperzka Год назад

    It's interesting how we circled all the way back to Aristotle and his arguments about whether void is possible and the existence of "potentiality".

  • @occultbass
    @occultbass Год назад +13

    Love this video, the concept of nothing haunted me when I was younger, very nice to have these different levels explained like this, and your sense of humor really made it fun too :) Thank you for all you do!

    • @MountainFisher
      @MountainFisher Год назад

      Nothing= not anything or non-existence. There you go a definition of nothing that is absolute. Someone once told me nothing is what sleeping rocks dream of, if you want to be poetic about it.

    • @occultbass
      @occultbass Год назад

      @jimmontg even "non existence" and "not anything" are something, because they are ideas

    • @ralyman2
      @ralyman2 Год назад

      I understand you, the concept still haunts me to this day, the same as the meaning of eternity.

  • @andrewparry814
    @andrewparry814 Год назад +12

    I came into this world with nothing and I still have most of it left.

  • @RogerFoxwellHypnotherapy
    @RogerFoxwellHypnotherapy Год назад

    Wow the most amusing video I've watched on RUclips for a long time.
    And I learnt something about nothing as well.

  • @user-xn4wq4sv3r
    @user-xn4wq4sv3r 6 месяцев назад

    Very interesting and informative. It's one of my favourite issues in philosophy.
    The highest level of nothing is pure nothing - Nothing. This notion is intuitively clear and simple. Of course, when we contemplate Nothing, using rational thinking, we notice a contradiction: Nothing is something. I could share my opinion on how to solve the contradiction, basing on Fichte and Hegel, but that would be too long a comment. Interestingly, the solution corresponds to a lower level of nothing, and this looks like a logical picture of creation from Nothing.

  • @leonardobattisti4016
    @leonardobattisti4016 Год назад +7

    I love your videos and this one was very entertaining.
    I watched it some days ago and now it got me thinking about Nothing.
    For me, Nothing is just a concept - with different levels as you explained -. There is nothing like nothing outside our thoughts and concepts, so you can't give someone nothing by giving him something.
    If he wants nothing for his birthday, you just don't give him anything. If you do give him the box, there is still the box.

  • @johneonas6628
    @johneonas6628 Год назад +44

    Thank you for the video.

    • @notanemoprog
      @notanemoprog Год назад +26

      Yeah, thanks for nothing I guess!

    • @turtle2720
      @turtle2720 Год назад +3

      @@notanemoprog Hahaha! Good one

  • @TheChazr
    @TheChazr Год назад

    The box you gave them supposedly containing nothing is something. Even wishing the person a 'Happy birthday' is something. Even not associating with them is still something. Nothing is a portmanteau term made up of 'no' and 'thing' and as a 'thing' can be any 'thing' something has to exist. Well not until the sentient being ceases to live. But that in itself is not nothing because no one can prove that there is (or is not) a soul or a spirit. Good show.

  • @norb6492
    @norb6492 Год назад

    Outstanding video as always.
    The answer I've liked best posits that the absolute potential must have expressions as it can't be absolute otherwise. This is of course more along the lines of philosophy rather than physics, considers the perspective of consciousness without an object, and reverses the concept of nothing to it's equivalent everything, but I still like it.
    I also like the tautology of the weak anthropic principle, and like to hope for something along the lines of the strong anthropic principle, but that's just my temperament talking.

  • @stefansender2634
    @stefansender2634 Год назад +18

    Apart from enjoying a very interesting topic, I'm impressed that you've managed to keep straight face throughout the whole video, excellent delivery! Were there many takes? :-)

  • @Mechanic1307
    @Mechanic1307 Год назад +10

    "Even the best theory can't explain its own existence" Perfect!

    • @narfharder
      @narfharder Год назад

      Exactly, the 2k page proof at 12:32 can't even apply to nothings 8 & 9 since there would be no truth statements or reasoning to work with.

  • @BananaDope
    @BananaDope Год назад +1

    After I showed this video to my friends, they no longer complained about the gifts I gave them!

  • @goldenlamb777
    @goldenlamb777 Год назад

    Sabine when I was little I had a high fever one night and tried to imagine nothing. I still ptsd about that moment. Don’t try alone 😅.

  • @joshuacornelius25
    @joshuacornelius25 Год назад +63

    This video should have included a clip of Brad Pitt's "what's in the box??"

  • @georgeindestructible
    @georgeindestructible Год назад +11

    Accurate af, with absurdly entertaining jokes!
    Semantics about this is everything we wanted to hear from Sabine at some point and it happened.
    Other physicists and people need to see this video to maybe help them realize....something about the what we really mean when we say "nothing" and the fact that it depends on the context.
    So, "nothing" doesn't seem to really exist or for long, even at the smallest currently known measure degree hence the levels of definitions for it.

    • @lukedowneslukedownes5900
      @lukedowneslukedownes5900 Год назад

      Relativity is a concept not talked about much in this vid, which has to do a lot with the physics and philosophy of one

    • @georgeindestructible
      @georgeindestructible Год назад

      ​@@lukedowneslukedownes5900 It wasn't the subject of the video, clearly.

  • @Badassmcawsome009
    @Badassmcawsome009 Год назад

    I find the philosophical opinions on why there is something rather than nothing at the end of the video really cool. It's almost as if existence is a brute force in and of itself, and if nothing exists something will always exist to spite it.

  • @NikTackett
    @NikTackett Год назад

    Thanks for the box

  • @davidtatro7457
    @davidtatro7457 Год назад +8

    Great video! Love the humor and the thoughtfulness, and for the record, l would be devasted by any birthday gift of a level of nothing that made cheese impossible.

  • @liberty-matrix
    @liberty-matrix Год назад +62

    "In a nutshell, the universe is 4% visible, 23% undetectable and 73% unimaginable." ~Tim Radford

    • @SunShine-xc6dh
      @SunShine-xc6dh Год назад +2

      Replace the word unimaginable with just plain imaginary and your on the right track

    • @jimsteen911
      @jimsteen911 Год назад

      @@SunShine-xc6dh hahaha, much agreed. When it comes to describing LCDM, imaginary takes on new meaning.

    • @SunShine-xc6dh
      @SunShine-xc6dh Год назад

      @@jimsteen911 such as fake? Made up? Not existing in the real world? Giving names to errors instead of fixing them?

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 Год назад

      Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
      Everything (something) is dual to nothing.
      Being is dual to non-being becoming creates becoming -- Plato's cat.
      Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates the converging thesis or synthesis (emergence) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic or Hegel's cat.
      Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition.
      Particles are dual to anti-particles, spin up is dual to spin down -- the Dirac equation.
      Schrodinger's cat is based upon Hegel's or Fichte's cat and they stole it from Plato.
      Duality creates reality.
      The big bang is an infinite negative curvature singularity and Gaussian negative curvature is defined with two dual points -- Janus holes/points:-
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature
      Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry -- non null homotopic.
      "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Synthesis or emergence is created by duality = Janus points.

    • @wavingdragon
      @wavingdragon 10 месяцев назад

      And 169% imaginable.

  • @gamerparker1235
    @gamerparker1235 Год назад +1

    I think there’s something rather than nothing because if there was nothing, we wouldn’t be able to discuss it. There may be some universes where there really is nothing, but since there’s obviously nothing in that universe, they can’t ask why there isn’t something. This makes it so only in the universes where there is something can you ask why there isn’t nothing. It’s sort of a reverse paradox if that makes sense.

  • @norbertblackrain2379
    @norbertblackrain2379 Год назад

    Seen this way it it so very complicated to give "nothing"! It is a great explanation.
    In general "nothing" might be described as the absence of something ...

  • @Viky.A.V.
    @Viky.A.V. Год назад +7

    That was really interesting, I couldn't think about the last two levels of nothing before your explanation, thanks a lot!

  • @lopezb
    @lopezb Год назад +7

    This is a a nice video, Sabine, interesting and light- hearted.
    As a mathematician, there are two other answers: the empty set (and von Neumann's beautiful idea of constructing all of the natural numbers - and thence all of mathematics- out of it using set theory), and zero probability (you can
    have events which are "impossible" in the sense of having probability zero, and yet can actually happen.) An example is choosing a point at random from the unit interval; the probability of choosing exactly that point beforehand is zero, hence impossible, and yet you did it! (So in this way mathematicians are doing the impossible every day!)
    A very different type of "nothing" is the nothing of zen Buddhism, which has maybe four aspects: it's actually quite fascinating from an intellectual point of view; it can only be talked about using paradoxical statements to point at what is meant; but it can only be really understood by "practice", which in its simplest-to-explain form comes out of doing
    zen meditation. The fourth aspect is that this is actually extremely practical as experiencing glimpses of this
    "nothingness" tends to be very healthy for our emotions, mind and body, essentially bringing one back to the state of
    "being yourself", acting very appropriately and naturally, without perhaps the usual stress and anger or fear we might
    often feel.
    Intellectually, this sort of "nothing" can be summarized by saying "no distinctions". Then "everything" is the same as "nothing" as everything is the same as everything else. This is one of those paradoxical statements I mentioned.
    This is different from set theory as "everything" would correspond to the Universe, the set of all sets, which by Russell's fascinating paradox is not itself a set. Sorry, that's just an aside! But once you grasp the intellectual idea of
    "everything is nothing", you can legitimately ask, "So what?". The point here is that understanding something is not the
    same thing as experiencing it deeply. Experiencing it deeply has itself many levels. (And yet of course doesn't have any levels at all!) But what I mean is that the first time you really feel this, it's pretty mind-blowing. It's an experience which is truly beyond words and is not even really an experience at all as it can't be labelled at all. This is a kind of mini-enlightenment or "opening". But, the next moment or the next day this is worth very little. (That and $3.50 will buy you a cup of espresso!) Really it only serves as a memory to remind you to try to sit down every morning on your black cushion for 20-40 minutes and try to just, well, just sit there, with relaxed breathing and good posture. Once you get kinda good at that, which may take decades (speaking from personal experience) it starts to become easier to get past the gates of annoyance and impatience and even physical or emotional pain and just be there. The consequence of all this is that afterwards, you may find yourself spontaneously doing something you had been putting off or might be kinder to a friend or a random stranger, or might suddenly have an unexpected spring in your step or twinkle in your eye. Or not! But that kind of nothing is, one might say, definitely worth Something!
    My favorite reference for Set Theory is Halmos' little book, and for zen is the Soto zen of Dogen, as explained by
    Suzuki Roshi in his lectures which can be found at cuke.com. Since zen can't really be explained directly in a useful way,
    many people try to point at it by way of a painting (like the famous Japanese or Chinese artworks) or by a poem.
    (But it can be just as well expressed in anything ...)
    Dogen was often poetic and said something like this:
    To study the Buddha way is to study the self.
    To study the self is to forget the self.
    To forget the self is to be awakened by all things.
    When awakened by all things, your body and mind drop away.
    When your body and mind drop away,
    No trace of this realization remains,
    And this no-trace continues forever...

    • @londen3547
      @londen3547 Год назад

      Hmm, an atypical carnal experience(biblically speaking). This reminds me of a bible verse. 2 Timothy 3:7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.

    • @questor5189
      @questor5189 Год назад

      An interesting analysis, I'll be true official. Your careful mathematical observations are appreciated; however, if the goal of Zen Meditation is a return of the Soul to Nothingness, then this is, in my best estimation, illogical. For there is no such thing as "Nothing".

    • @aaronbredon2948
      @aaronbredon2948 Год назад +1

      Your Probability Zero is not 0%, it is a probability of 1/infinity - which approaches 0 but is still possible (infinitesimal).
      A true 0% probability is the chance of rolling a 100 on a 6 sided die with faces 1,2,3,4,5,6.
      You can divide by an infinitesimal, while you cannot divide by 0.

    • @questor5189
      @questor5189 Год назад

      @@aaronbredon2948 Understood. I believe the Mandelbrot Set best demonstrates your point. In Mathematics, zero is the absence of value, but in reality, there can never be a total absence of anything. If time, space, matter, or even a Divine Spirit never existed, neither would we.

  • @wiederecovsky
    @wiederecovsky 10 месяцев назад

    It's quite simple. When we think of the whole of infinite density and extension, filling space-time completely, we realize that fullness devoid of voids is as absurd as nothingness. So, what we have is a space-time filled with varying levels of densities and energy. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!

  • @natasjailnyckyj2674
    @natasjailnyckyj2674 Год назад

    best birthday gift tbh

  • @biermeester
    @biermeester Год назад +71

    A good enough answer for me to the "why is there something rather than nothing" question, is that there's only 1 way for there to be nothing but that are countless ways for there to be something.

    • @SabineHossenfelder
      @SabineHossenfelder  Год назад +23

      Interesting argument!

    • @biermeester
      @biermeester Год назад +11

      @Arbane's Sword of Agility It doesn't. But the question was why, not _how_ ;-)

    • @CheatOnlyDeath
      @CheatOnlyDeath Год назад +4

      I like that answer. And one juxtaposed with infinity is indistinguishable from zero.

    • @HenryBabcock
      @HenryBabcock Год назад +2

      Interesting but... How do we really know there's only one way for there to be nothing. There could be zero ways. There could also be one way. That's already two possible ways. 😂

    • @ExistenceUniversity
      @ExistenceUniversity Год назад +2

      @@biermeester Existence Exists, and to exist is to have identity. There is no such *thing* as a *nothing*. That which exists exists as something, that which has no identity does not exist and cannot take up any space. You can never have a kind of nothing. It's impossible. So your original answer is close, but not extreme enough, there are endless ways for things to be, and never a way for a nothing to be a thing.

  • @MrJohnHaga
    @MrJohnHaga Год назад +5

    Thank you!! Inspiring!!! My thought game: a vacuum is a nothingness that still is something. A void is a nothingness that still is something. And then a nothingness that is beyond time and space. And further a nothing that is beyond - the beyond. Never existed and never will exist. Can't even cease because it never was or will be. Nothing that is nothing is not…🙏