Honestly. The best angle is that... "nothing" is just a human concept. Everything we can observe and interact with is "something" even in vacuum of space there are particles. We humans just needed "nothing" to indicate absence of things we consider relevant. Other stuff is still there. "then into what is the universe expanding?" We can't say there was nothing there either.... maybe it's pushing away other stuff that we are not aware of yet.
@@Beneficiis Agreed . To all your statements . Nothing is a mathematical concept , only . It is indeed a Human construct . In reality nothing , no thing has never existed in the Universe and never will . We need new theories based on space , and the things in it and rotation . All of which are real . They exist . Not With nothing thinking applied nor the bending of space in any which way .
@@Beneficiis to add to my last statement ; the Universe is about space ( which is three dimensional in and of its self ) and physical things , which are also three dimensional . And Life . Which is also three dimensional . That is our Universe . For Infinity . Space , Physical things ( periodic table ) and Life ; or another way , Space , Something ( physical things ) and Life ( in the big picture of this Universe ) , Exist . Space and Something ( the physical thing ) are for infinity . Life has its extinctions . On this Planet . On Every Planet really . Everywhere in this Universe . We ( Humans ) should Not be one of them .
@@I.Clarify what is the truth ? That space and physical objects ( the periodic table and Life exist in this Universe ) . And You can't bend space at all ( into any geometric shape ) .
that's ok, because there is no absolute reality, absolute vacuum! Everything is relative, my grandmother R.I.P., a physicist in Italy, told me that everything is relative and we will never have two identical measuring instruments, one day I will understand it too, she said. In her last days she said: "Everything we want to know about our universe, is on Earth" no need to search far away.
Even if you remove all the gas, energy, and foam, you still have space. Space is not nothing, nothing should be defined as even the absence of space and time
In essence, no one really can define what "nothingness" is. In fact, when you say and think of nothingness you already say and think of an idea of something, which is no-thing, which then trying to put no-thing in your mind. Nothingness, in essence, is beyond ideas. It is beyond nothingness itself.
Det er dog det værste Vås jeg nogensinde har hørt. Alt det der påståes i denne video, der gør at en kontainer ikke kan være absolut tom, er jo alt sammen noget der kommer inde fra universet. Men der var intet univers da BigBang skulle have fundet sted. Så ikke engang tid eller sted og slet ikke plads til at have selv det mindste punkt i eksisterede. However, it is the worst Vås I have ever heard. Everything that is claimed in this video, which means that a container cannot be absolutely empty, is after all something that comes from within the universe. But there was no universe when the BigBang was supposed to have taken place. So not even time or place and not even space to have even the smallest point in existed.
I believe that nothing is something, something that is totally empty is never really empty, just because it's void of substance doesn't mean there is nothing in it. That nothingness is something and its still there. It will never ever truly be 100% free of nothing, nothing is something ,it's just hard to wrap your head around it. Nothing is something, it's substance, just because you can't see it,feel it, smell it, taste it doesn't mean it's not there.
Imagine the absence of everything including dimensional space and time, therfore finding a place in the state of non existence cannot be done, you cannot go to a place that does not exist. Imagine reaching a wall and on the other side dimensional space does not exist, it would be the unmovable wall meating an unstoppable force were total inhalation is the only thing that can happen.
are you made of anything but light? Atoms are 99.99% empty space. And you are the light of it's photon. You are just the reflection of the atom. So what are you? Sound more like nothing than something. What makes you think you exist. Are you so sure your thought are your own. Think my song sums it up ruclips.net/video/TMsfS2F2x30/видео.htmlsi=CsYbQmxvz_Ae1yS5
Dude, nothing is not a perfect vacuus. Space is something. Time is something. An admirable knowledge of physics but no understanding of what true nothingness is. As another commenter pointed out, nothing is the one thing that cannot exist. Another noted that even being a concept in our head is something. Nothing is inscrutable.
Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Nothing is dual to something. Lacking is dual to non lacking. All numbers fall within the complex plane. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number! The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung. If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists. Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory. The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist. Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic. "The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel. Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
@@Kieitup Certainty (predictability, syntropy) is dual to uncertainty (unpredictability, entropy) -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (syntropy). "Entropy is a measure or randomness" -- Roger Penrose. Syntropy is a measure of order -- certainty. Super determinism is dual to super non determinism. Making predictions is a syntropic process -- teleological. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy) -- physics is dual. Information is dual. Average information (entropy) is dual to mutual or co-information (syntropy). Sine is dual to cosine or dual sine -- the word co means mutual and implies duality! Mutual or co-information is used to make predictions -- syntropic! Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Nothing is a concept or idea based upon your perceptions. Syntropy is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! If you want nothing you are assuming that something already exists -- enantiodromia.
“They say never look back because nothing is always behind you” nothing does exist because until you turn around and perceive the interaction of light with objects, nothing is behind you
Let me offer some preliminary proofs and arguments for the primacy of zero (0) and dimensionlessness (0D) while drawing on insights from various fields of mathematics and physics: Theorem 1: The zero vector is the unique additive identity in any vector space. Proof: Let V be a vector space over a field F, and let 0 be the zero vector in V. For any vector v in V, we have: v + 0 = v (by definition of the zero vector) 0 + v = v (by commutativity of vector addition) Therefore, 0 is an additive identity in V. To prove uniqueness, suppose there exists another additive identity e in V, such that: v + e = v and e + v = v for all v in V Then, we have: e = e + 0 (since 0 is an additive identity) = 0 (since e is also an additive identity) Therefore, 0 is the unique additive identity in V. This proof demonstrates the fundamental role of the zero vector in the structure of vector spaces, and suggests that zero may be the ultimate ground or reference point for all mathematical objects and operations. Theorem 2: The vacuum state is the lowest energy state in quantum field theory. Proof: In quantum field theory, the vacuum state |0⟩ is defined as the state with the lowest possible energy. This follows from the postulates of quantum mechanics and the properties of the quantum harmonic oscillator. Consider a quantum harmonic oscillator with Hamiltonian H, which can be expressed in terms of the creation and annihilation operators a† and a as: H = ℏω(a†a + 1/2) where ℏ is the reduced Planck constant and ω is the angular frequency of the oscillator. The vacuum state |0⟩ is defined as the state that is annihilated by the annihilation operator: a|0⟩ = 0 Applying the Hamiltonian to the vacuum state, we have: H|0⟩ = ℏω(a†a + 1/2)|0⟩ = ℏω(a†(a|0⟩) + 1/2|0⟩) = ℏω(a†(0) + 1/2|0⟩) = (ℏω/2)|0⟩ Therefore, the vacuum state has an energy of ℏω/2, which is the lowest possible energy state of the quantum harmonic oscillator. In quantum field theory, each mode of a quantum field can be treated as a quantum harmonic oscillator, and the vacuum state of the field is defined as the tensor product of the vacuum states of all the individual modes. Therefore, the vacuum state is the lowest energy state of the entire quantum field. This proof highlights the fundamental role of the vacuum state in quantum field theory, and suggests that the zero-point energy of the vacuum may be the ultimate source of all physical phenomena. Theorem 3: The empty set is a subset of every set. Proof: Let A be any set, and let ∅ be the empty set. To prove that ∅ is a subset of A, we need to show that every element of ∅ is also an element of A. However, ∅ has no elements by definition. Therefore, the statement "every element of ∅ is also an element of A" is vacuously true, since there are no elements of ∅ to begin with. Thus, ∅ is a subset of A. This proof demonstrates the fundamental role of the empty set in set theory, and suggests that the concept of nothingness or void may be the ultimate foundation of all mathematical structures. Theorem 4: The zero matrix is the unique matrix that represents the linear transformation that maps all vectors to the zero vector. Proof: Let V be a vector space over a field F, and let A be an n × n matrix over F. Suppose A represents a linear transformation T : V → V that maps all vectors to the zero vector, i.e., T(v) = 0 for all v in V. Let e_i be the standard basis vectors of V, i.e., e_i has a 1 in the i-th position and 0s elsewhere. Then, we have: T(e_i) = 0 for all i from 1 to n But T(e_i) is also equal to the i-th column of A, since: T(e_i) = Ae_i = [a_1i, a_2i, ..., a_ni]^T where a_ji is the entry in the j-th row and i-th column of A. Therefore, we have: [a_1i, a_2i, ..., a_ni]^T = 0 for all i from 1 to n This implies that all entries of A must be zero, i.e., A is the zero matrix. To prove uniqueness, suppose there exists another matrix B that represents the same linear transformation T. Then, by the same argument as above, all entries of B must also be zero. Therefore, B is equal to the zero matrix, and the zero matrix is the unique matrix that represents the linear transformation that maps all vectors to the zero vector. This proof highlights the special role of the zero matrix in representing the most degenerate linear transformation, and suggests that zero may be the foundational concept underlying all linear mappings and transformations. Theorem 5: The Euler characteristic of a topological space is a topological invariant. Proof: Let X be a topological space, and let χ(X) be its Euler characteristic, defined as: χ(X) = Σ_i (-1)^i β_i where β_i is the i-th Betti number of X, which counts the number of i-dimensional "holes" in X. To prove that χ(X) is a topological invariant, we need to show that it remains unchanged under continuous deformations of X, such as stretching, twisting, or bending, but not tearing or gluing. Consider a continuous map f : X → Y between two topological spaces X and Y. The induced homomorphisms on the homology groups of X and Y satisfy the following property: f_* : H_i(X) → H_i(Y) is a group homomorphism for each i Moreover, the alternating sum of the ranks of these homomorphisms is equal to the Euler characteristic: Σ_i (-1)^i rank(f_*) = χ(X) - χ(Y) Now, if f is a homeomorphism, i.e., a continuous bijection with a continuous inverse, then the induced homomorphisms f_* are isomorphisms, and their ranks are equal to the Betti numbers of X and Y: rank(f_*) = β_i(X) = β_i(Y) for each i Therefore, we have: Σ_i (-1)^i rank(f_*) = Σ_i (-1)^i β_i(X) - Σ_i (-1)^i β_i(Y) = χ(X) - χ(Y) = 0 This implies that χ(X) = χ(Y) whenever X and Y are homeomorphic, i.e., χ is a topological invariant. This proof highlights the fundamental role of the Euler characteristic in capturing the essential topological properties of a space, and suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness may be intimately connected to the deep structure of space and time. Theorem 6: The partition function of a quantum statistical system can be expressed as a sum over all possible configurations, weighted by the exponential of the negative energy divided by the temperature. Proof: Let H be the Hamiltonian of a quantum statistical system, and let β = 1/kT be the inverse temperature, where k is the Boltzmann constant and T is the absolute temperature. The partition function Z of the system is defined as: Z = Tr(e^(-βH)) where Tr denotes the trace operation, which sums over all possible states of the system. Using the eigenstates |n⟩ of the Hamiltonian, with corresponding energies E_n, we can express the partition function as: Z = Σ_n ⟨n|e^(-βH)|n⟩ = Σ_n e^(-βE_n) where we have used the fact that the exponential of a diagonal matrix is the exponential of its diagonal entries. Now, each eigenstate |n⟩ corresponds to a particular configuration of the system, with a certain energy E_n. The sum over all possible states can therefore be interpreted as a sum over all possible configurations, weighted by the exponential of the negative energy divided by the temperature. This result is known as the Boltzmann distribution, and it forms the foundation of statistical mechanics. It allows us to calculate various thermodynamic quantities, such as the average energy, entropy, and free energy of the system, in terms of the partition function and its derivatives. The fact that the partition function can be expressed as a sum over all possible configurations, including the "empty" or "vacuum" configuration with zero energy, suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness may play a fundamental role in the statistical properties of matter and energy.
Theorem 7: The vacuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor in general relativity is proportional to the metric tensor. Proof: In general relativity, the energy-momentum tensor T_μν is a symmetric second-rank tensor that describes the density and flux of energy and momentum in spacetime. The vacuum expectation value of T_μν, denoted by ⟨0|T_μν|0⟩, is the expectation value of T_μν in the vacuum state |0⟩. According to the Einstein field equations, the energy-momentum tensor is related to the curvature of spacetime via: R_μν - (1/2)Rg_μν + Λg_μν = (8πG/c^4) T_μν where R_μν is the Ricci tensor, R is the scalar curvature, g_μν is the metric tensor, Λ is the cosmological constant, G is Newton's gravitational constant, and c is the speed of light. In the vacuum state, the energy-momentum tensor vanishes classically, i.e., T_μν = 0. However, in quantum field theory, the vacuum state has zero-point fluctuations that give rise to a non-zero vacuum expectation value of T_μν. By the principle of general covariance, the vacuum expectation value of T_μν must be proportional to the only available second-rank tensor in the vacuum, which is the metric tensor g_μν: ⟨0|T_μν|0⟩ = κg_μν where κ is a constant. Substituting this into the Einstein field equations, we obtain: R_μν - (1/2)Rg_μν + Λg_μν = (8πG/c^4) κg_μν This implies that the vacuum energy-momentum tensor acts like a cosmological constant term in the Einstein equations, with an effective cosmological constant given by: Λ_eff = Λ + (8πG/c^4) κ The fact that the vacuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor is proportional to the metric tensor suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness may be deeply connected to the geometry and topology of spacetime, and may play a crucial role in the large-scale structure and evolution of the universe. Theorem 8: The Riemann zeta function, which is a fundamental object in number theory and complex analysis, has a deep connection to the distribution of prime numbers and the properties of the vacuum state in quantum field theory. Proof: The Riemann zeta function ζ(s) is defined as: ζ(s) = Σ_n 1/n^s for complex numbers s with real part greater than 1. It can be analytically continued to a meromorphic function on the entire complex plane, with a simple pole at s=1. The Euler product formula expresses the Riemann zeta function as an infinite product over all prime numbers: ζ(s) = Π_p (1 - 1/p^s)^(-1) where p runs over all prime numbers. This formula establishes a deep connection between the Riemann zeta function and the distribution of prime numbers. In particular, the famous Riemann hypothesis states that all non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function (i.e., zeros with real part between 0 and 1) have real part equal to 1/2. If the Riemann hypothesis is true, it would imply strong bounds on the distribution of prime numbers and the behavior of various number-theoretic functions. Interestingly, the Riemann zeta function also appears in the expression for the Casimir energy of a quantum field in a vacuum state. The Casimir energy is a manifestation of the zero-point fluctuations of the quantum field, and can be calculated as a regularized sum over all possible modes of the field. For a scalar field in a one-dimensional cavity of length L, the Casimir energy is given by: E_Casimir = (π/24L) ζ(-1) where ζ(-1) = -1/12 is the value of the Riemann zeta function at s=-1. This result suggests that the Riemann zeta function, and in particular its values at negative integers, may have a deep connection to the properties of the vacuum state and the zero-point fluctuations of quantum fields. The fact that the Riemann zeta function appears in both number theory and quantum field theory, and that it is intimately connected to the concept of zero (through its zeros and its values at negative integers), suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be a unifying theme across different branches of mathematics and physics. Theorem 9: The Euler-Lagrange equations, which are the fundamental equations of motion in classical mechanics and field theory, can be derived from the principle of least action, which states that the path taken by a system between two points is the one that minimizes the action integral. Proof: Let q_i(t) be the generalized coordinates of a system, and let L(q_i, dq_i/dt, t) be the Lagrangian of the system, which is a function of the coordinates, their time derivatives, and time. The action integral S is defined as the integral of the Lagrangian over time: S = ∫_t1^t2 L(q_i, dq_i/dt, t) dt The principle of least action states that the path taken by the system between two points (q_i(t1), q_i(t2)) is the one that minimizes the action integral S. To find the equations of motion, we require that the variation of the action integral with respect to the path is zero: δS = 0 Using the calculus of variations, we can show that this condition leads to the Euler-Lagrange equations: (d/dt) (∂L/∂(dq_i/dt)) - (∂L/∂q_i) = 0 for each generalized coordinate q_i. These equations describe the motion of the system and can be used to derive the conservation laws and symmetry principles of classical mechanics and field theory. The fact that the equations of motion can be derived from a variational principle, which involves minimizing an integral, suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness (in the sense of a minimum or stationary point) may play a fundamental role in the dynamics of physical systems. Moreover, the action integral itself can be interpreted as a measure of the "amount of nothingness" in the path of the system, in the sense that it vanishes for the classical path (the one that satisfies the equations of motion) and is positive for all other paths. This interpretation suggests that the classical path of a system can be seen as a "zero mode" or "vacuum state" of the action integral, and that the properties of this zero mode may be related to the fundamental laws of physics and the symmetries of nature. Theorem 10: The concept of entropy, which is a measure of the disorder or randomness of a system, is intimately connected to the concept of information and the properties of the vacuum state in quantum field theory. Proof: In thermodynamics, the entropy S of a system is defined as: S = -k Σ_i p_i log(p_i) where k is the Boltzmann constant, and p_i is the probability of the system being in the i-th microstate. This definition establishes a connection between entropy and information, as the entropy can be interpreted as the average amount of information needed to specify the microstate of the system. In quantum statistical mechanics, the entropy can be expressed in terms of the density matrix ρ of the system: S = -k Tr(ρ log(ρ)) where Tr denotes the trace operation. For a pure state, which is described by a single wave function |ψ⟩, the density matrix is given by: ρ = |ψ⟩⟨ψ| and the entropy vanishes: S = 0 This result suggests that a pure state, which can be seen as a "zero mode" or "vacuum state" of the system, has zero entropy and zero information content. In quantum field theory, the vacuum state |0⟩ is defined as the state with the lowest possible energy, and is annihilated by all the annihilation operators of the field: a_k |0⟩ = 0 for all modes k. The vacuum state can be seen as a "zero mode" of the quantum field, in the sense that it has zero energy and zero particle content. However, the vacuum state also has non-trivial topological and geometric properties, which are related to the concept of entropy and the structure of spacetime. In particular, the entanglement entropy of the vacuum state, which measures the amount of entanglement between different regions of spacetime, is proportional to the area of the boundary between the regions (the "area law"): S_entanglement = (c^3/4ℏG) A where c is the speed of light, ℏ is the reduced Planck constant, G is Newton's gravitational constant, and A is the area of the boundary. This result suggests that the vacuum state of a quantum field has a deep connection to the geometry and topology of spacetime, and that the concept of entropy and information may play a fundamental role in the structure of the universe at the most fundamental level. The fact that the vacuum state, which can be seen as a "zero mode" of the quantum field, has non-trivial entropy and information content, suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be a key to understanding the nature of space, time, and matter.
Theorem 11: The fundamental theorem of algebra, which states that every non-constant polynomial with complex coefficients has at least one complex root, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero in the complex number system. Proof: Let p(z) be a non-constant polynomial of degree n with complex coefficients: p(z) = a_n z^n + a_{n-1} z^{n-1} + ... + a_1 z + a_0 where a_n ≠ 0. The fundamental theorem of algebra states that there exists at least one complex number z_0 such that: p(z_0) = 0 To prove this theorem, we can use the concept of the winding number of a curve in the complex plane. Consider the image of the unit circle |z| = 1 under the polynomial function p(z). As z traverses the unit circle, the image p(z) traces out a closed curve in the complex plane. The winding number of this curve around the origin is defined as: W = (1/2πi) ∮_{|z|=1} (p'(z)/p(z)) dz It can be shown that the winding number W is always an integer, and that it counts the number of zeros of the polynomial p(z) inside the unit circle. Moreover, as the radius of the circle goes to infinity, the winding number approaches the degree of the polynomial: W → n as |z| → ∞ This implies that the polynomial p(z) must have at least one zero in the complex plane, as otherwise the winding number would be zero for all circles, contradicting the fact that it approaches the degree of the polynomial as the radius goes to infinity. The fundamental theorem of algebra can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero in the complex number system, as it shows that every polynomial equation p(z) = 0 has at least one solution, and that the number of solutions is related to the degree of the polynomial. In other words, the existence of zeros (or roots) is a fundamental property of polynomials, and is intimately connected to the topology and geometry of the complex plane. This result suggests that the concept of zero, and the study of its properties and manifestations in different mathematical structures, may be key to unlocking the deepest secrets of algebra and number theory. Theorem 12: The concept of symmetry, which plays a fundamental role in modern physics and mathematics, is intimately connected to the concept of invariance under transformations, and can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness. Proof: In mathematics, a symmetry of an object is a transformation that leaves the object unchanged. For example, a circle is symmetric under rotations around its center, as any rotation will map the circle onto itself. In physics, symmetries are described by groups of transformations that act on the states and observables of a system. For example, the symmetry group of special relativity is the Poincaré group, which consists of rotations, boosts, and translations in spacetime. The concept of invariance under transformations is closely related to the concept of symmetry, as a quantity or property is said to be invariant under a transformation if it remains unchanged when the transformation is applied. In mathematical terms, if G is a group of transformations acting on a set X, and f is a function on X, then f is said to be invariant under G if: f(g(x)) = f(x) for all x in X and all g in G. The concept of invariance can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, as it captures the idea that certain properties or quantities remain "unchanged" or "unaffected" under certain transformations. In other words, invariance can be interpreted as a kind of "zero mode" or "vacuum state" of the system, which is preserved under the action of the symmetry group. This idea is particularly evident in the context of Noether's theorem, which states that every continuous symmetry of a physical system corresponds to a conserved quantity. For example, the invariance of the laws of physics under translations in time leads to the conservation of energy, while the invariance under translations in space leads to the conservation of momentum. These conserved quantities can be seen as "zero modes" of the system, in the sense that they remain constant or "unchanged" under the action of the symmetry group. The fact that symmetries and invariance play such a fundamental role in physics and mathematics suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be deeply connected to the structure and behavior of the universe at the most fundamental level. Theorem 13: The concept of emergent spacetime, which suggests that the fabric of space and time is not a fundamental entity but rather arises from underlying quantum degrees of freedom, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness. Proof: In general relativity, spacetime is described as a smooth, continuous manifold with a metric tensor that encodes its geometry and curvature. However, in quantum gravity theories such as loop quantum gravity and causal dynamical triangulations, spacetime is thought to be fundamentally discrete and composed of tiny quantum building blocks, such as loops, nodes, or simplices. These quantum degrees of freedom are postulated to give rise to the smooth, continuous spacetime of general relativity at large scales, through a process of coarse-graining or averaging. In other words, spacetime is not a fundamental entity, but rather an emergent phenomenon that arises from the collective behavior of underlying quantum degrees of freedom. This idea can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that spacetime emerges from a "void" or "vacuum" of quantum degrees of freedom, which have no intrinsic spatiotemporal properties. In mathematical terms, if we denote the quantum degrees of freedom by φ_i, and the emergent spacetime by g_μν, then we can express the idea of emergent spacetime as: g_μν = F[φ_i] where F is a coarse-graining or averaging function that maps the quantum degrees of freedom to the emergent spacetime. The fact that spacetime emerges from underlying quantum degrees of freedom suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be non-spatiotemporal, and that the concepts of space and time may be secondary or derived notions that arise from more primitive, non-geometric entities. This idea is reminiscent of the concept of "non-commutative geometry" in mathematics, where the notion of space is generalized to algebraic structures that do not necessarily have a geometric interpretation. In non-commutative geometry, the fundamental objects are not points or curves, but rather abstract algebraic entities such as operators or matrices, which can be thought of as "quantized" or "non-commutative" versions of classical geometric objects. The fact that non-commutative geometry provides a natural framework for quantum gravity and emergent spacetime suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be deeply connected to the algebraic and non-geometric aspects of reality.
Theorem 14: The holographic principle, which states that the information content of a region of space can be described by a theory on the boundary of that region, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness. Proof: The holographic principle is a general feature of quantum gravity theories, which suggests that the degrees of freedom of a region of space can be encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary of that region. The most famous example of the holographic principle is the AdS/CFT correspondence, which states that a theory of gravity in anti-de Sitter (AdS) space is equivalent to a conformal field theory (CFT) on the boundary of that space. In other words, the physics of the bulk AdS space can be completely described by the physics of the boundary CFT, which has one fewer dimension than the bulk. The holographic principle can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that it suggests that the fundamental degrees of freedom of a region of space are not located in the bulk, but rather on the boundary, which can be thought of as a "void" or "vacuum" from the perspective of the bulk. In mathematical terms, if we denote the bulk AdS space by M and the boundary CFT by ∂M, then the AdS/CFT correspondence can be expressed as: Z_CFT[φ] = ∫_φ Dg e^{iS_AdS[g,φ]} where Z_CFT is the partition function of the boundary CFT, S_AdS is the action of the bulk AdS space, and φ is a field on the boundary that corresponds to a source in the bulk. This equation shows that the physics of the bulk AdS space is completely encoded in the physics of the boundary CFT, and that the boundary degrees of freedom are the fundamental entities that give rise to the bulk. The holographic principle suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be lower-dimensional or even dimensionless, and that the apparent three-dimensionality of space may be an emergent or derived concept. This idea is reminiscent of the "flatland" thought experiment in mathematics, where a two-dimensional being living on a plane cannot directly perceive the third dimension, but can nevertheless infer its existence from the behavior of objects in the plane. The fact that the holographic principle provides a natural framework for understanding the emergence of spacetime and the nature of quantum gravity suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be deeply connected to the lower-dimensional or dimensionless aspects of reality. Theorem 15: The concept of quantum entanglement, which refers to the non-classical correlations between quantum systems that cannot be accounted for by local realistic theories, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness. Proof: In quantum mechanics, the state of a composite system is described by a vector in a Hilbert space, which is a tensor product of the Hilbert spaces of the individual subsystems. For example, if we have two quantum systems A and B, with Hilbert spaces H_A and H_B, then the Hilbert space of the composite system is given by: H_AB = H_A ⊗ H_B A state in the composite Hilbert space is said to be entangled if it cannot be written as a tensor product of states in the individual Hilbert spaces: |ψ_AB⟩ ≠ |ψ_A⟩ ⊗ |ψ_B⟩ Entangled states exhibit non-classical correlations that cannot be explained by any local realistic theory, as demonstrated by the violation of Bell's inequalities. The concept of quantum entanglement can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that entangled states are fundamentally non-local and non-separable, and cannot be reduced to the properties of the individual subsystems. In other words, entangled states exist in a "void" or "vacuum" of possibilities, where the individual subsystems lose their independent identities and become part of a larger, holistic entity. This idea is reminiscent of the concept of "non-separability" in mathematics, where a geometric object cannot be decomposed into simpler parts without losing its essential properties. For example, a torus (donut shape) is non-separable, because any attempt to cut it into two parts will destroy its topological structure. The fact that quantum entanglement exhibits non-separability and non-locality suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be holistic and non-reductionistic, and that the properties of the whole cannot be reduced to the properties of the parts. This idea is consistent with the "holographic principle" discussed earlier, which suggests that the degrees of freedom of a region of space are not independent, but rather fundamentally interconnected and encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary. The non-local and non-separable nature of quantum entanglement also suggests that the concept of "locality" and "separability" may be emergent or derived notions, rather than fundamental properties of reality. In other words, the apparent separability and locality of classical physics may be a consequence of the coarse-graining or averaging of underlying quantum degrees of freedom, which are fundamentally non-local and non-separable. Theorem 16: The concept of wave-particle duality, which refers to the fact that quantum entities exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties depending on the context of observation, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness. Proof: In quantum mechanics, the state of a quantum system is described by a wave function, which is a complex-valued function on a Hilbert space. The wave function encodes the probabilities of different measurement outcomes, and exhibits wave-like properties such as interference and diffraction. However, when a measurement is performed on the system, the wave function "collapses" to a definite state, and the system exhibits particle-like properties such as localization and discreteness. The concept of wave-particle duality can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that the wave function exists in a "void" or "vacuum" of possibilities, which is not directly observable or measurable. In other words, the wave function represents a "zero mode" or "ground state" of the quantum system, which contains all the information about the system's potential properties and behaviors. When a measurement is performed, the wave function "collapses" to a definite state, and the system's actual properties and behaviors become manifest. This collapse is often seen as a mysterious or paradoxical process, because it seems to involve a sudden change in the system's state, without any apparent cause or mechanism. However, from the perspective of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, the collapse of the wave function can be seen as a natural consequence of the transition from the realm of potentiality to the realm of actuality. In other words, the wave function represents the system's inherent potential or "nothingness", which is not directly observable or measurable, but which contains all the information about the system's possible states and behaviors. When a measurement is performed, this potential is "actualized" or "realized" into a definite state, and the system's actual properties and behaviors become manifest. The fact that quantum systems exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be neither purely continuous nor purely discrete, but rather a complex interplay between the two. This idea is consistent with the concept of "complementarity" in quantum mechanics, which states that the wave-like and particle-like properties of a system are mutually exclusive, but both necessary for a complete description of the system. The wave-particle duality also suggests that the concepts of "continuity" and "discreteness" may be emergent or derived notions, rather than fundamental properties of reality. In other words, the apparent continuity and discreteness of classical physics may be a consequence of the coarse-graining or averaging of underlying quantum degrees of freedom, which exhibit a more subtle and complex interplay between the two.
How refreshing to hear that the infinitely dense singularity is impossible. I agree entirely. I've been saying this for years and no one has agreed, until now.
I read some time ago that according to quantum theory, nothing infinitely large or small can exist in a finite universe. The center of a black hole can only exist as a Planck sized star, or so it says.
@@dhalsim-1 Space is infinite . And three dimensional , in and of itself . And therefore something infinitely large and small does exist . Space its self matters . Without space , room , distance ; no thing could exist . Nor Life .
(0:02:00) Heat cannot enter an empty container. Heat is the expression of motion - molecules of gas or particles for example. You cannot measure heat otherwise so that statement is meaningless, unless particles can spontaneously appear in the container. Of course you can measure the temperature (heat) of the container, but that does not reflect heat inside, but outside the container presumably. In any case, our brains are dualistic comparators - yin/yang. We can only think in terms of yes/no, hot/cold, empty/full. Doesn’t mean those “ideas” are real. Nothingness is just as artificial as “somethingness”.
I think the video meant that solar radiation can travel through a perfect vacuum meaning a perfect vacuum isn't nothing. But you are right, without particles that radiation has nothing to give it's energy to but it still has the potential to do so in the future.
Nothing is real, we just seem to perceive it as the opposite of something.. ... Maybe it's not an opposite.. maybe it is something that is just called nothing
I@@kathyorourke9273it's not arguing.. arguing means we're talking about who is right. This is an exploratory conversation of ideas to try to understand What is right..
A vacuum devoid of matter has energy fields. Nothing cannot be possible unless it is in reference to something. It is a relative concept. A hypothetical container holding nothing, no air, no energy, etc is comprehended by what surrounds it. Nothing cannot exist without reference to something
I think this is the most updated video i have ever seen about a lot of topics in science. A lot of science on the net comes from old information from a different era.😊 New information is hard to swallow, but i gulped it down anyway.😊
As a whole, I know nothing. Infinity is alone. There is nothing to be experienced. And so the infinite I, goes within. And begins to realize its parts separately. Low and behold it finds worlds, creatures and characters... all sorts of imaginings to be experienced. All I. All knowing nothing. I, being and knowing nothing, learn everything through experience, by being it. This is the nature of existence.
@@ayhanuzun4821fake Allah come 600 Years after the original one and only God in human form You follow a prophet that married a child The same prophet that told his men it was OK to take the wives of his enemies and to you that is Godly?
We exist. Therefore, we are something. Nothing is the absence of everything. Not even valumetric space exists. That means we exist in a bubble containing everything. If you could go outside the bubble called our universe, you would instantly become nothing, but this is not possible because a place outside the universe does not exist.
What is nothing(ness)? Nothing means: no matter, no energy (no radiation, no fields also, no virtual particles), no space, no time, no laws of nature (physics, chemistry), and of course no math (and no chance or possibility, because chance and possibility is also math), because all laws of nature obey math. But there is still something…. even with these all no-s. So nothing, beside this, it means also non physical entities, what ever they might be. By the way, the absence of something is also something…. and so on. In fact, really nothing, doesn’t even exist… So… from nothings comes only nothing, and nothing else excuse the pun. Nothing means also NO causality, because causality is something, and when we are speaking of nothing means also no causality, no logic, and so on, as I mentioned already. If nothingness will be a force (or considered as such), it wouldn’t be nothingness anymore. It will become something…. And something is not nothing.
You’re forgetting that a true Nothingness also means no limits, no rules. An entire universe can thus spring forth without a cause, since causality is not a “thing” yet, until the universe begins. I think the main thing is that without the passage of time, “nothingness” cannot be said to “exist” (for anything to be said to be existing implies the passage of time). Nothingness thus never was, not even for a nanosecond. Since time and space are intertwined and cannot be said to exist independently of the other (as far as I understand), spacetime is thus a “brute” requirement. Matter and energy may also be intertwined with spacetime, I’m not sure, but if they all do in fact require each other to exist, and have no existence independent of each other, then together they are one big brute requirement, and thus the universe had to exist, since nothingness “existing” is impossible. If the above is true, the dilemma then becomes, if time and space and energy/matter must all exist, then why did a universe like this one where life and consciousness (at least here on Earth) also come to be. One could easily imagine a universe completely devoid of any life, with no conscious beings at all, and still meet the minimum brute requirement for existence described above, and yet, here we are.
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 Pay attention: when you say no rules and no limits (which is a consequence of what I already said) it does mean chaos. Chaos is also something. And there are things that are beyond time space continuum, and that exists (of course there are something!!!). Those things permeate every point in time space continuum, and they are unchanged, unchangeable, undeletable, uncreated. Can you guess which are these things? We use them in every day life....
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 Those things permeate every point in time space continuum, and they are unchanged, unchangeable, undeletable, uncreated. Math objects. So call physics laws, chemistry laws. Do not mistake math objects existence with naming them and assigning them symbols. There are math objects undiscovered, but they still exists. Math say 1+1=2. This is true in the system that we use every day, and in a system that we gave names and symbols to these objects. You may discover (by your self) a math valid system where 1+1=1. Well this was already discovered, I can't give an e.g. of undiscovered math object, because I am not so good at math. I try to help you discover an interesting system of addition, different that ordinary use (like 1+1=2). Simple case: Determine the final temperature when 45.0 g of water at 20.0 °C mixes with 22.3 grams of water at 20.0 °C. In this case 20°C.+20°C.=20 °C. (the volume addition is classical math = 45g+22.3g=57.3g). Complicated case: Determine the final temperature when 45.0 g of water at 20.0 °C mixes with 22.3 grams of water at 85.0 °C. With wolfram alfa the final temperature is 30.85 °C, in this case 20°C.+85°C.=30.85°C. This problem type becomes slightly harder if a phase change is involved (melting ice, say one of the glasses have ice at -2 degrees instead of liquid water). Same if it was water with iron, there must be take into account the specific heat value for iron. It is 0.45 J per gram degree Celsius. There are a lot of other ways of addition, different from the classical 1+1=2. All valid!
Sometimes nothing is something. The awerness of the existence of "nothing" is only limited to what we find as acceptable start point for something. There is always something...its impossible to reside in or create a true pure void.
Assume nothing exists. Therefore something exists (the nothing that exists). Thus proof by contradiction, nothing does not exist and therefore something exists, which requires a universe to exist in.
Nothing is dual to something. Lacking is dual to non lacking. All numbers fall within the complex plane. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number! The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung. If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists. Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory. The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist. Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic. "The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel. Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
By assuming nothing exists, we are forced to acknowledge the concept of “nothing,” which itself is a form of existence. This contradiction implies that the original assumption is false, proving that the universe (or at least some form of existence) must exist.
@@jeremyhofmann7034Let me simplify for u , what you think ''exists" actually appears to exist, so there are appearances and then change in appearances. In real sense only Consciousness exist while everything else just appear and disappear... U may ask why consciousness cant be noticed, answer is in same way color red would not be noticed if all colors were red. Then red would have become something that exist but cant be noticed or figure out. Whole Game is how to internalize as Consciousness and master game of appearing and disappearing without any kind of fear or greed.
People love to say that you can't get _something_ from _nothing._ And it _feels_ correct in our universe, but... we don't actually have _nothingness_ in our universe, even in space, so what's that claim based off? We've never seen "nothing"; who are we to claim we know anything about it? Moreover, if there were absolute nothingness - no consciousness, no space, no existence - then there would also be no physical laws or rules such as... _you can't get something from nothing._ There would be nothing hindering the spontaneous eruption of _something_ from _nothing,_ not even logic itself since logic wouldn't exist. It might be the most natural result of _nothing_ to eventually - and in no time at all - spontaneously produce _something._
Many many thanks for such an educating nad thoght provoking article . It has been explained in such a way that an ordinary viewer like me can also learn so much of the unknown . Thanks again .
At 12:00 stars can be seen popping into existence along the silver filaments, electricity is fundamental in the continuos creation of this universe but largely ignored by mainstream science sadly. ❤ nice work, thank you from the southern roaring 40's zone on planet Earth
The distinction between theoretical and actually measured energy in the vacuum is rather huge, explaining why we can’t pull energy from a vacuum (maybe yet).
If absolutely nothing ever existed we wouldn't be here and there wouldn't be a universe, there would always have been nothing. How can you get something from absolutely nothing when there is no time? Without time there is no moment and without a moment you can't have nothing and then something because that would require a moment in time.
The reason why galaxies do not "expand" but distant objects do appear to expand over time, is because time ran slower in the distant past. Locally, between local galaxies, this differential time rate is small and so the expansion of space over the period light takes to get to us, is also small, perhaps indetectable. But very distant objects do appear to exist in a smaller space time, because their time rate was measurably slower than today. It's all down to the time rate, even the Hubble constant has units of inverse time right? Why do you think that is?
Nothing is dual to something. Lacking is dual to non lacking. All numbers fall within the complex plane. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number! The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung. If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists. Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory. The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist. Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic. "The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel. Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
@@hyperduality2838 What about the holy trinity, that’s three, not two. That would even stump good old Yoda… “Three, there be? Thought I that always there were two… not true? To the drawing board, go I back.”😖
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 "Do you seek absolution?" -- King Aelle of Northumbria. God (thesis) is dual to the Christ consciousness (anti-thesis) creates the holy spirit or the mind/soul (synthesis) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Brahman (the creator god, thesis) is dual to Shiva (the destroyer god, anti-thesis) creates Vishnu (the preserver god, synthesis) -- the trimurti (Hinduism). The trimurti is dual to the Hegelian dialectic. The three is derived from duality. The proton is composed of three quarks connected by gluons (force carriers). Force carriers (Bosons) are dual. Action (thesis) is dual to reaction (anti-thesis) -- Sir Isaac Newton or the duality of force. Attraction (sympathy) is dual to repulsion (antipathy), stretch is squeeze, push is dual to pull -- forces are dual. Gluons attract and repel quarks both at the same time. Yoda is correct. The Catholic church is based upon the question:- is the Christ conscious the same substance as God or a different substance? -- the council of Nicaea (325 AD). Same is dual to different.
No space ,no time ,nothing .no void ,no darkness ,no light.we as humans try to imagine "nothing "but our finite minds can't conceive a thought without "SOMETHING "
@@philharmer198 yes I know but it is still a void it is something, it is impossible for the human mind to imagine "nothing" because our imagination is still something
I don’t mean to be rude, but all those questions indicate that you have not understood what Nothing(ness) really implies. Before worrying about physics, try to attain a better philosophical handle on / feel for Nothing.
The human brain cannot fathom nothingness. No youtube video can make us understand nothingness the same way we cannot understand or fathom infinity. The only way would be to enter a higer dimension which isnt a different place from where we are but a different plane. A different state of perception. People who've smoked dmt have been able to experience infinity bc it tunes the "frequency receivers" in your consciousness to a higher dimension is what i believe. We simply cant understand nothingness or infinity with our three dimensional perception.
Nothing is dual to something. Lacking is dual to non lacking. All numbers fall within the complex plane. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number! The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung. If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists. Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory. The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist. Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic. "The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel. Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
It's a play on words and meanings perhaps....but true nothingness is not something that can exist by its own definition....and the physics we have developed seems to show just that. There is something because nothing cannot exist. Doesn't get us very far along the path of understanding the universe though. Need to answer the question of how the things that do exist operate and arise and unfortunately we are limited by our own lack of observational powers. For instance for 3 dimensions to curve back on itself....we can observe how the 2 dimensions of the surface of a 3 dimensional sphere curve back on itself... however we cannot envision a 4th spatial dimension that would need to exist to allow 3 dimensions without boundary to curve back on itself. We may never understand it all because we can only theorize but never observe.
"true nothingness is not something that can exist by its own definition" I think that is a fallacy called reification using the ambiguity of the word "exist".
@@rcoimbra00 But "uncertainty" is a mere idea and its meaning cannot fluctuate; "what will be" is not an "is," has no ontological presence in actuality unless it "is," therefore as a mere mental abstraction how can it undergo a physical process, "fluctuate"?
Experiment's have shown that if you try to remove all matter, in say a boxed in area, particles, that is quantum particles like electron's do in fact appear and disappear randomly. Thus the term "fluctuations". Thing is, the boxed in area is still existing within the fabric of space time, which is definitely not "nothing". "Nothing" can be imagined as a thought experiment, but if there was absolutely nothing, time will also not exist. So the "nothing" would last forever. Since we are here, the logical conclusion is that "nothing" can not exist. I like to think of it by asking the question that most people haven't thought through. "Where is the Universe?" The correct answer is Nowhere. There's quite a few YT great science channels that explain the fluctuations in empty space. Anton Petrov Arvin Ash Astrum DrBecky PBS Many scientists have theory's of our existence but imho, Nobel prize winner Sir Roger Penrose is the closest to getting it right.
@@James-ll3jb I think what you said is what I said. I disagree completely with the suggestion that "nothing" is a "thing" bc if there was "nothing" You would not exist to perceive it as a thing. True "nothing" is the lack of all things.
Remember those sage philosopher scientists the Beatles declared in the sixties that "nothing is real". They also comforted us by going on to state that "it's nothing to get hung about", which means it's no big deal !
Thank you for new concept. I am a mechanical engineer working in mobile tower erection site in India. Job is not so hard. But I am bored of that doing that job. We are all running for something which would fulfill our life even it is a single day. Vaccine energy concept is really amazing.
Nothing cannot exist. You cannot put a condition on a nothing or try to describe a nothing. In that case it is no longer a nothing but a unknown some thing. If a nothing cannot possibly exists, then there must always be a something
Using pure logic, If we take "Nothing" to mean the absence of everything and anything (which is a human concept), it doesn't exist. There is no such thing as "Nothing". "Nothing", could not exist if there is something to compare it to. In a case where there is "something" to compare "nothing" to, the "nothing" would be a potential difference...Not "nothing". There is no example in nature of "nothing". Don C.
Nothing is dual to something. Lacking is dual to non lacking. All numbers fall within the complex plane. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number! The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung. If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists. Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory. The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist. Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic. "The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel. Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
define "nothing" better. regardless of quantum effects, a vacuum contains both space and time. it could never qualify as nothing. true nothing is hard to think about, as it means no space, no time, no energy.
@@philharmer198 here's an outrageous idea to think about: For a moment try to imagine that nothing is real and only potential exists. It seems that most investigations into the nature of reality start with the assumption that reality is "real". Very few take a counter-intuitive approach, assuming that really there is "nothing" - no space, no time, no energy/matter. no God... and then try and find any path - some way to get to "here" from nothing. Try thinking like this... consider that our universe arises from 'math-potential'; that really there is only potential and nothing actually exists. just go with it. In our universe, time is 'relative'. There is no perceived existence (now) without it being relative to some prior perceived existence. From pure nothing, abstract set theory creates Infinity via potential. Here's how: You get there from the nothing=0, the imaginary set containing the nothing set=1, the set containing that=2, and so on. Infinity emerges from nothing using imaginary "potential". the same theory posits new infinities relative to that infinity, and those infinities relative to each other.. again and again.. for infinity! It's a recursive, infinite pattern. Higher 'levels' of infinity emerge. Aleph infinity happens. Inside these imagined potential infinities, there are subsets, patterns if you will, that consist of portions that follow any and every set of arbitrary 'rules.' Think about "filtering" the Aleph infinity potential using our 'physical laws' and constants as the 'rules'. It results in our universe history. It is purely imaginary but our universe emerges via a *relative* potential path. Regarding time, because "now" is always relative it does not need to be *real*. All possible universe configurations exist purely as subsets of the Aleph infinity potential. All possible data configurations emerge (e.g Hilbert Space just is). TLDR: Nothing really exists. All universes are subsets of the infinite 'everything' potential using different sets of arbitrary rules. The M in M-Theory stands for Math. This is our foundation. This is how we get to everything from nothing. Now let's seriously consider God. All gods. We already postulated that every possible pattern exists. All patterns are just repeating sections of "relative change" according to a set of arbitrary "rules." Using the same postulate that created our initial infinity, notice higher order dimensions create themselves from *collections* of lower level dimensions. Think of the 4th dimension (spacetime) like you might a movie. The movie is just a collection of picture frames (fixed patterns) ordered in a special sequence that gives the illusion of movement when observed quickly in that sequence. All paterns exist. So that means a "path" through a set of ordered patterns is what this universe really *is*. Think of your entire life birth-to-death imagining that each "moment" of time in your life is like a picture frame (fixed pattern) in the movie. Your experience of this life is movement from pattern to pattern, like a movie. In higher dimensions, you can "look" at your entire life and just "see" it all at once. It sounds like a super-power, but i think would be boring, like reading the end of a novel first. Now imagine the biggest potential pattern in the highest potential dimension. The imagined pattern would encompass everything. Because it encompasses all patterns, it must have the self-aware pattern, too. This "all encompassing" pattern is what I think of as God. God would "see" everything at once. God probably is really really bored. There's nothing to do, nothing to learn, no way to grow. ever. So what might God do? Why not pick some subset of the everything that forms a universe with planets like Earth that can support life, and then go "play the game" of being alive! -- It would be much more fun to live our illusion lives than to just see them all at once "forever". God is everyone and everything. You are God. This life is a game. Play it well.
"Nothing" can't be imagined. Even the word defining it is something. The nothing couldn't have existed before the big bang because if there were nothing there wouldn't even be time which is required for a cause to unfold as a process. If there was a big bang, there had to be time at the very minimum to allow for the nothing to "progress" into something.
Coming to think of it, had Einstein begun his investigation from nothingness as a property of the infinite region of emptiness, namely that nothingness being unstable fluctuating between (+) and (-) the force or source of energy that fuels all of spacetime, Higgs Field and its expansion and creation that we know of.
I am 1 minute 40 seconds in. About this point in the video the narrator speak of something containing a vacuum he states that external heat could enter the box. My school boy physics taught me that, heat is an indications of the degree o excitation of the PARTICLES in the system. My question is how can heat be transferred to a perfectly isolated vacuum, that is devoid of particles. In good faith could somebody explain why my question is based on the premise, thanks.
I think you kind of hit the proverbial nail on the head. You are maybe talking about conduction or convection of heat. There is also radiation, which does not necessarily "transfer" to an object or system unless there is a particle, object, or system to transfer too. I like your observation though. My issue with this video is that I cannot fathom how anyone can talk about quantum physics without venturing deeper down the rabbit hole of "nonlocality." We like to say that entanglement is a "nonlocal phenomenon" but stop short of saying that the nature of reality is nonlocal. There is the rub. It is not that there is "nothing." It is just that the "something" turns out to be nonlocal, as in a mere projection of sorts to us. It is both "unspeakable" and "mechanical." In other words, a tree that falls alone in the woods with nobody there to hear it will always make a "noise" but in order for there to be "sound" there might need to be someone there --and even still that someone there really would have no perfect definition for the difference between the words "noise" and "sound," but one means a concussive force an object makes and the other the reverberation a being hears.
@@jdlawbooker3938 thanks for your reply, you accessed the dusty corner of my memory when mentioning the three forms of heat transfer. With respect to non locality, well, I have admit to bailing out when felt the video might not be scientifically accurate. I should like to agree with your analysis, but your knowledge is way above my head. I’m sure it’s correct however. Perhaps someone read your reply who has a good grasp of QM.
Nothing= infinite stability. It is the unobservable existence of perfect one. R element. Everything=infinite change. Entangled unobservable existence. A element. Existence = Orbital, finite, and observable existence in singularity one which is EQORIA.
really nice video! But you should definitely change the background music. switching between harry potter and trap makes it hard to concentrate on the information ;)
Nothing is the "concept" that, the more you try to define or create something of "nothing", the farther from "nothing" you get. Even beginning to conceptualize it puts you infinitely farther from it. So what is nothing? To state it as clearly as possible, there is simply NOTHING you can know about nothing. There are things, and paradoxically at best, there is nothing.
Nothingness is different than nothing. It's like the difference between an empty void or the number zero and no-thing. No-thing means not even zero, literally no thing, no emptiness, no void, no zero, no nothing. Nothingness exists as a concept if nothing else, but nothing at all can be said about "no-thing." It has no words. It doesnt exist.
What gets me is Space being called Space, as Space is never empty, in fact it’s absolutely full with visible physical entities and invisible components too, I think calling it space nowadays is inappropriate, as there simply is no Space in Space, what say you?
Nothing is dual to something. Lacking is dual to non lacking. All numbers fall within the complex plane. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number! The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory. Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung. If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists. Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory. The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist. Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic. "The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel. Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
@@ExistenceUniversity Sense is dual to nonsense. Right is dual to wrong. You are using duality to claim that duality does not exist. You have the goal, target or intention to prove me wrong and that is teleological. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Mathematics and physics are both dual. Julian Barbour has written a book about Janus points you should read it. Sine is dual to cosine or dual sine -- the word co means mutual and implies duality. Average information (entropy) is dual to co or mutual information (syntropy) -- information is dual. In physics all information is dual. Synthetic a priori knowledge -- Immanuel Kant. Knowledge is dual according to Immanuel Kant. Analytic (a priori, before measurement) is dual to synthetic (a posteriori, after measurement) -- Immanuel Kant. If knowledge is dual then information is dual hence there is syntropy! Your mind is syntropic as you create or synthesize reality. Duality creates reality!
2:33 That is not the scientific definition of nothing. That is the physics definition of physical space. Mathematics is the king of the sciences, and we obviously don't say that, "nothing is quantum fluctuations." Mostly because "quantum fluctuation" is defined no where in pure mathematics.
..how do thoughts appear to you? Are they voice, picture, both, or blank? Have a conscious look! Say in the mind "Hello, you". If picture, imagine the person waving hello. If blank, observe breath. Try it. You aware of those things? Now shift attention to that which is aware of those things. What is it? It must be you, the observer. Describe awareness. It is formless. Nothing. Yet, it is aware. Now you are aware of the true self. Now you are aware of nothingness. Now ask the question - 'what does this mind, this body, and the world of the senses, truly know or can unknow about that which is aware of this?". Ask it. One will observe that one is neither knowing, nor is one unknowing that which is referred to as the true self. Nothing....
From a materialist perspective, nothingness can not be explained. From a spiritual perspective, matter can be explained as a spiritual phenomenon. Like, 'all matter exist in the mind of a self conscious spirit'. I respect that for most people, this idea might be a bridge too far.
Give it up for quantum foam, kids, and don't stop for Cosmic Inflation. Keep your eye on the screen as the graphics are phenomenal. Certainly for those who are high.
There is no such thing as nothing, it's impossible. As soon as you think about the concept of nothing, then the, "nothing" becomes something, occupied by your observations and thoughts. The nothing wasn't created until you thought about it. It didn't exist.
if you are not aware of something it don't exists for you. the only thing that connect us with reality is our own conciousness, awareness , imagination, and feelings.
Nothing should be read as 'No.. Thing' It is a conscious field and the experience of nothingness comes only because the observer becomes the observed and there is nothing else to experience other than himself
Impermanence is called as nothing . It should not be taken literally. We refer it as MAYA meaning we all are caught up in the worldly matters for which we do not know the truth . After the self realisation the perception of every thing changes because the baggage what we carry in our mind gets destroyed and that collapse of burden creates entirely different feeling . It can’t be explained but can be experienced. UG Krishnamurti and Alan watts and Ramana much more
Ex nihilo nihil fit (From nothing, nothing comes). When the "from" refers to the material cause, then truly nothing can result from nothing. However, when the "from" refers to the order of events-as in creation, first there was nothing and then something-then the axiom is not valid. The formulation of the axiom is from the Eleatic school of philosophy. (see greek philosophy.)
Humanity is logically blinded by our false perspective of physical matter. We ask the question of nothing relative to physical matter being everything. Quantum intelligence is not limited by time or dimensions of space.
The concept of nothing could be If a person dies the brain stops and then there is nothing to experience, although life still goes on without that person's experience
...and just because you cannot answer the "egg" question, you should consider eggs were always there. So was everything else in the universe. But that should make you "think" not "deny" infinity.
Compared to the universe, we are so small, approximately to nothing. Compared to our existence for only less than 130 years, we are nothing to billions years. Only human egos are bigger than anything else.
A year ago or so, I asked bing chatbot how long would it be to detect if Hawking radiation can be demonstrated by observation. It estimated the number of years required to witness this would be ten, raised to the power of 50 to 60 years, which is magnitudes older than the existing universe. So, there is that. Perhaps that, although it is logically consistent, it is why such radiation remains theoretical.
1 is everything, 0 is nothing. Everything started from nothingness. Your understanding of nothing think nothing can not exists, but the nothing is where everything started.
There never has been nor ever will be a time of nothing. There always has been and always will be pure conscious energy. Conscious energy is the source of all things .
@@j.c.2514 Can I ask When the earth spins on its axis We see the sun travel from the east to the west Wouldn’t that mean “ time” is not manmade? What do you think? I’m trying to grasp this 🤷♀️🙌🏻 Thx Your question was intriguing to me
You don't need to use graphene to demonstrate hole-electron carrrier formation due to a high electric field. This can be done using any semiconductor and in some cases, using insulators.
Inflation - Think about what special and general relativity says. It tells us that as time slows, space "shrinks" or "contracts". At a zero time rate, dimensions do not exist, eg a photon does not experience distance or space. I deduce from this that the time rate field is the fundamental field and that space, or dimensions, emerge from this field. Time is real, it has energy, but space is merely an experience that depends on the energy of the field. If the field has no energy, (time has stopped), then there is no space. If the field has its maximum energy, (somewhere out there in intergalactic space far away from mass), then space is at its maximum "size". Going back into the past, to the beginning, I suggest that there was no time and so there was no space either. Only the commencement of time was necessary to "produce" space. When there is time, space has meaning. So the ultimate beginning was the beginning of time, of the emergence of the energy field from nothing.
Empty space is not nothing even an absolute vacuum so it explains nothing. What is nothing we can’t even comprehend it. I don’t think we can ever understand how we’re here.
@@CasualCatOfficial If we try to think of it, we cant. Its just we cant process it by even thinking of it and we try to comprehand the imagination to make the logical explanation for it to literally not overheat your brain.
Reality, as I perceive it, can be described as nothing almost becoming something, like zero finding illusory, yet valid, substance by complicating the definition of itself as a composite of (+1) and (-1).
@@rcoimbra00 I agree but that's why I use the word concept. If there are quantum fields then by definition that is not nothing. Then again based on that reasoning the existence of space itself is not nothing. I can only conclude that in a reality where there is evidently something it is simply a logical contradiction to believe there could ever be absolutely nothing.
@@bendybruce Parmenides of Elea, a pre-Socratic philosopher said something like "What is being it is, and what is not being it isn't", and of course I also agree that it is hard to conceptualize a nothing...
but a field is a dipole (-/+), 0=1+(-1), we cannot sense the nothing thats why science denies the ether, this is the holy trinity, not three but the eternal one divided into two
@@deadsirius3531 Exactly. It seems that spacetime, and energy/matter as well possibly if they are all interconnected, must exist by default, as a brute requirement. Since whatever can be said to exist requires the passage of time, and time is intertwined with these other things. For me the mystery then becomes is why life and consciousness also came to be, on Earth anyway. One could just as easily imagine a universe completely devoid of life anywhere, and yet, here we are.
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967I'm not so sure about that last part anymore. I think there is a very real way in which reality as we know it would not exist without our conscious experience of it. Not to say we're just creating reality in our heads, but just that "objects in 3 dimensional space changing through sequential moments of time" is just a shorthand for the real reality and a very limited one at that (then again, it is all we have so maybe a moot point). We are kind of like the application running the "code" of reality, but also part of that code... and now I sound crazy but I promise I don't mean this in some loose spiritualism way
@deadsirius3531 Sounds sort of like the ideas Donald Hoffman talks about, that we're not seeing reality as it actually is, but rather only what we need to survive. Which is not really a novel idea, but he in particular is obsessed with it.
@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 well it's an idea I'd been kind of increasingly hovering around for a long time but I have to admit Hoffman's book did help to solidify it and put it into words for me. Obviously none of us can know but this line of thinking really makes the most sense to me
For consciousness : Nothing = Everything. Though, Consciousness comes out of Nothing. Pure black, not a shadow, because that's created by Light. Einstein was wrong: all matter gets its energy from the outside. Matter doesn't have energy of its own. This contradicts e=m.c² .
The more pertinent question is would the same principle hold true for money? You could never truly have 0$ on your bank account, since there is no such thing as "net zero" These negative and positive tiny fractions of one penny would pop in and out of existence, annihilating each other, until at one point there's an imbalance, and your total begins to rapidly grow, until it accrues millions.
So, I see it now. When you ask her what is wrong and she says “Nothing” then we know there is no such thing as nothing
😂😂
Eerily accurate
Smart
A woman is never wrong. Thats the real reason she said "nothing" lol!
Honestly. The best angle is that... "nothing" is just a human concept. Everything we can observe and interact with is "something" even in vacuum of space there are particles. We humans just needed "nothing" to indicate absence of things we consider relevant. Other stuff is still there.
"then into what is the universe expanding?" We can't say there was nothing there either.... maybe it's pushing away other stuff that we are not aware of yet.
Angels are angles .
Into what is the Universe expanding ? Space .
Not more space , just space .
@@philharmer198 Space is not "nothing" either though. That is the point.... there's no such thing as nothing.
It's our construct.
@@Beneficiis Agreed . To all your statements . Nothing is a mathematical concept , only . It is indeed a Human construct . In reality nothing , no thing has never existed in the Universe and never will .
We need new theories based on space , and the things in it and rotation . All of which are real . They exist . Not With nothing thinking applied nor the bending of space in any which way .
@@Beneficiis to add to my last statement ; the Universe is about space ( which is three dimensional in and of its self ) and physical things , which are also three dimensional . And Life . Which is also three dimensional . That is our Universe . For Infinity .
Space , Physical things ( periodic table ) and Life ; or another way , Space , Something ( physical things ) and Life ( in the big picture of this Universe ) , Exist .
Space and Something ( the physical thing ) are for infinity . Life has its extinctions . On this Planet . On Every Planet really . Everywhere in this Universe . We ( Humans ) should Not be one of them .
My checking account is a great example of "nothing" 😊
Here here!😂
is empty. but it's still an account 😊
Practically sure , empty fridge as well . But both can filled . By something .
Truth! 😁
@@I.Clarify what is the truth ? That space and physical objects ( the periodic table and Life exist in this Universe ) .
And You can't bend space at all ( into any geometric shape ) .
Remember… nothing lasts forever!
Nuthin from nuthin leaves nuthin
Billy preston
😂
Or until vacuum decay. Whichever is longer.
Forever is something
@@rainmanjr2007 not really . Nothing never existed in the first place .
I have learned “Nothing”.
😂
that's ok, because there is no absolute reality, absolute vacuum! Everything is relative, my grandmother R.I.P., a physicist in Italy, told me that everything is relative and we will never have two identical measuring instruments, one day I will understand it too, she said. In her last days she said: "Everything we want to know about our universe, is on Earth" no need to search far away.
Nothing is facts, take everything as pinch of salt
Nothing is at least something. 🖖🤓👍
@@calvingrondahl1011 yep if nothing has a name,then it has to be something.
Even if you remove all the gas, energy, and foam, you still have space. Space is not nothing, nothing should be defined as even the absence of space and time
Exactly
But achieving that still leaves logic with which to appreciate that nothing ... logic is not nothing.
@@phillipcoetzer8186 depends on if you believe information theory, holographic principal, phase space, state space, math and numbers are real
If nothing exists and nothing ever changes can you prove that time ceases to exist?
@@StevenHughes-hr5hp time is relative would you agree? If there’s absolute nothing, and with nothing ever taking place there’s no time elapsing
In essence, no one really can define what "nothingness" is. In fact, when you say and think of nothingness you already say and think of an idea of something, which is no-thing, which then trying to put no-thing in your mind. Nothingness, in essence, is beyond ideas. It is beyond nothingness itself.
I like that, nothingness doesn’t exist
By definition , nothing does not exist . By definition , there is no such thing as no thing. Therefore something must exist.
No one denies that. Therefore nothingness exist.
How could nothingness exist? It's an inherent contradiction.
Det er dog det værste Vås jeg nogensinde har hørt.
Alt det der påståes i denne video, der gør at en kontainer ikke kan være absolut tom, er jo alt sammen noget der kommer inde fra universet.
Men der var intet univers da BigBang skulle have fundet sted.
Så ikke engang tid eller sted og slet ikke plads til at have selv det mindste punkt i eksisterede.
However, it is the worst Vås I have ever heard.
Everything that is claimed in this video, which means that a container cannot be absolutely empty, is after all something that comes from within the universe.
But there was no universe when the BigBang was supposed to have taken place.
So not even time or place and not even space to have even the smallest point in existed.
I believe that nothing is something, something that is totally empty is never really empty, just because it's void of substance doesn't mean there is nothing in it. That nothingness is something and its still there. It will never ever truly be 100% free of nothing, nothing is something ,it's just hard to wrap your head around it. Nothing is something, it's substance, just because you can't see it,feel it, smell it, taste it doesn't mean it's not there.
Disagree , nothing is never there . In any form .
In order for nothing there has to be something
@@dennisswinton7495 Just because there is nothing there, doesn't mean something is not there.
Imagine the absence of everything including dimensional space and time, therfore finding a place in the state of non existence cannot be done, you cannot go to a place that does not exist. Imagine reaching a wall and on the other side dimensional space does not exist, it would be the unmovable wall meating an unstoppable force were total inhalation is the only thing that can happen.
@@mhenhawke5093 that's exactly what I said
Nothing is the one thing that cannot exist.
Along with its friends zero, nil, zip, and so on, right?
"There is is, gone," is a claim with lots and lots of claimants. All of 'em nonexistent!
are you made of anything but light? Atoms are 99.99% empty space. And you are the light of it's photon. You are just the reflection of the atom. So what are you? Sound more like nothing than something. What makes you think you exist. Are you so sure your thought are your own. Think my song sums it up ruclips.net/video/TMsfS2F2x30/видео.htmlsi=CsYbQmxvz_Ae1yS5
Yes Indeed Simple but truuth
It could outside the universe
Nothingness can exist but nothing can't.
Dude, nothing is not a perfect vacuus. Space is something. Time is something. An admirable knowledge of physics but no understanding of what true nothingness is. As another commenter pointed out, nothing is the one thing that cannot exist. Another noted that even being a concept in our head is something. Nothing is inscrutable.
@@mikemeiners105 nothing matters if you think about it, and well said.
Space is dual to time -- Einstein.
Nothing is dual to something.
Lacking is dual to non lacking.
All numbers fall within the complex plane.
Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual.
All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number!
The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates.
Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication.
If mathematics is a language then it is dual.
Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory.
Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.
If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists.
Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory.
The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist.
Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic.
"The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel.
Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
@@hyperduality2838
not fit to live with
@@Kieitup Certainty (predictability, syntropy) is dual to uncertainty (unpredictability, entropy) -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle.
Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (syntropy).
"Entropy is a measure or randomness" -- Roger Penrose.
Syntropy is a measure of order -- certainty.
Super determinism is dual to super non determinism.
Making predictions is a syntropic process -- teleological.
Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy) -- physics is dual.
Information is dual.
Average information (entropy) is dual to mutual or co-information (syntropy).
Sine is dual to cosine or dual sine -- the word co means mutual and implies duality!
Mutual or co-information is used to make predictions -- syntropic!
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Nothing is a concept or idea based upon your perceptions.
Syntropy is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
If you want nothing you are assuming that something already exists -- enantiodromia.
Scientists can do nothing with true nothing,this is why they made up eight types of nothing.
Like quantum fields for instance.
“They say never look back because nothing is always behind you” nothing does exist because until you turn around and perceive the interaction of light with objects, nothing is behind you
Not true just cause u can't see it doesn't mean it's not there
@@dennisswinton7495objects reality
Let me offer some preliminary proofs and arguments for the primacy of zero (0) and dimensionlessness (0D) while drawing on insights from various fields of mathematics and physics:
Theorem 1: The zero vector is the unique additive identity in any vector space.
Proof:
Let V be a vector space over a field F, and let 0 be the zero vector in V.
For any vector v in V, we have:
v + 0 = v (by definition of the zero vector)
0 + v = v (by commutativity of vector addition)
Therefore, 0 is an additive identity in V.
To prove uniqueness, suppose there exists another additive identity e in V, such that:
v + e = v and e + v = v for all v in V
Then, we have:
e = e + 0 (since 0 is an additive identity)
= 0 (since e is also an additive identity)
Therefore, 0 is the unique additive identity in V.
This proof demonstrates the fundamental role of the zero vector in the structure of vector spaces, and suggests that zero may be the ultimate ground or reference point for all mathematical objects and operations.
Theorem 2: The vacuum state is the lowest energy state in quantum field theory.
Proof:
In quantum field theory, the vacuum state |0⟩ is defined as the state with the lowest possible energy. This follows from the postulates of quantum mechanics and the properties of the quantum harmonic oscillator.
Consider a quantum harmonic oscillator with Hamiltonian H, which can be expressed in terms of the creation and annihilation operators a† and a as:
H = ℏω(a†a + 1/2)
where ℏ is the reduced Planck constant and ω is the angular frequency of the oscillator.
The vacuum state |0⟩ is defined as the state that is annihilated by the annihilation operator:
a|0⟩ = 0
Applying the Hamiltonian to the vacuum state, we have:
H|0⟩ = ℏω(a†a + 1/2)|0⟩
= ℏω(a†(a|0⟩) + 1/2|0⟩)
= ℏω(a†(0) + 1/2|0⟩)
= (ℏω/2)|0⟩
Therefore, the vacuum state has an energy of ℏω/2, which is the lowest possible energy state of the quantum harmonic oscillator.
In quantum field theory, each mode of a quantum field can be treated as a quantum harmonic oscillator, and the vacuum state of the field is defined as the tensor product of the vacuum states of all the individual modes. Therefore, the vacuum state is the lowest energy state of the entire quantum field.
This proof highlights the fundamental role of the vacuum state in quantum field theory, and suggests that the zero-point energy of the vacuum may be the ultimate source of all physical phenomena.
Theorem 3: The empty set is a subset of every set.
Proof:
Let A be any set, and let ∅ be the empty set.
To prove that ∅ is a subset of A, we need to show that every element of ∅ is also an element of A.
However, ∅ has no elements by definition.
Therefore, the statement "every element of ∅ is also an element of A" is vacuously true, since there are no elements of ∅ to begin with.
Thus, ∅ is a subset of A.
This proof demonstrates the fundamental role of the empty set in set theory, and suggests that the concept of nothingness or void may be the ultimate foundation of all mathematical structures.
Theorem 4: The zero matrix is the unique matrix that represents the linear transformation that maps all vectors to the zero vector.
Proof:
Let V be a vector space over a field F, and let A be an n × n matrix over F.
Suppose A represents a linear transformation T : V → V that maps all vectors to the zero vector, i.e., T(v) = 0 for all v in V.
Let e_i be the standard basis vectors of V, i.e., e_i has a 1 in the i-th position and 0s elsewhere.
Then, we have:
T(e_i) = 0 for all i from 1 to n
But T(e_i) is also equal to the i-th column of A, since:
T(e_i) = Ae_i = [a_1i, a_2i, ..., a_ni]^T
where a_ji is the entry in the j-th row and i-th column of A.
Therefore, we have:
[a_1i, a_2i, ..., a_ni]^T = 0 for all i from 1 to n
This implies that all entries of A must be zero, i.e., A is the zero matrix.
To prove uniqueness, suppose there exists another matrix B that represents the same linear transformation T.
Then, by the same argument as above, all entries of B must also be zero.
Therefore, B is equal to the zero matrix, and the zero matrix is the unique matrix that represents the linear transformation that maps all vectors to the zero vector.
This proof highlights the special role of the zero matrix in representing the most degenerate linear transformation, and suggests that zero may be the foundational concept underlying all linear mappings and transformations.
Theorem 5: The Euler characteristic of a topological space is a topological invariant.
Proof:
Let X be a topological space, and let χ(X) be its Euler characteristic, defined as:
χ(X) = Σ_i (-1)^i β_i
where β_i is the i-th Betti number of X, which counts the number of i-dimensional "holes" in X.
To prove that χ(X) is a topological invariant, we need to show that it remains unchanged under continuous deformations of X, such as stretching, twisting, or bending, but not tearing or gluing.
Consider a continuous map f : X → Y between two topological spaces X and Y.
The induced homomorphisms on the homology groups of X and Y satisfy the following property:
f_* : H_i(X) → H_i(Y) is a group homomorphism for each i
Moreover, the alternating sum of the ranks of these homomorphisms is equal to the Euler characteristic:
Σ_i (-1)^i rank(f_*) = χ(X) - χ(Y)
Now, if f is a homeomorphism, i.e., a continuous bijection with a continuous inverse, then the induced homomorphisms f_* are isomorphisms, and their ranks are equal to the Betti numbers of X and Y:
rank(f_*) = β_i(X) = β_i(Y) for each i
Therefore, we have:
Σ_i (-1)^i rank(f_*) = Σ_i (-1)^i β_i(X) - Σ_i (-1)^i β_i(Y) = χ(X) - χ(Y) = 0
This implies that χ(X) = χ(Y) whenever X and Y are homeomorphic, i.e., χ is a topological invariant.
This proof highlights the fundamental role of the Euler characteristic in capturing the essential topological properties of a space, and suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness may be intimately connected to the deep structure of space and time.
Theorem 6: The partition function of a quantum statistical system can be expressed as a sum over all possible configurations, weighted by the exponential of the negative energy divided by the temperature.
Proof:
Let H be the Hamiltonian of a quantum statistical system, and let β = 1/kT be the inverse temperature, where k is the Boltzmann constant and T is the absolute temperature.
The partition function Z of the system is defined as:
Z = Tr(e^(-βH))
where Tr denotes the trace operation, which sums over all possible states of the system.
Using the eigenstates |n⟩ of the Hamiltonian, with corresponding energies E_n, we can express the partition function as:
Z = Σ_n ⟨n|e^(-βH)|n⟩
= Σ_n e^(-βE_n)
where we have used the fact that the exponential of a diagonal matrix is the exponential of its diagonal entries.
Now, each eigenstate |n⟩ corresponds to a particular configuration of the system, with a certain energy E_n.
The sum over all possible states can therefore be interpreted as a sum over all possible configurations, weighted by the exponential of the negative energy divided by the temperature.
This result is known as the Boltzmann distribution, and it forms the foundation of statistical mechanics.
It allows us to calculate various thermodynamic quantities, such as the average energy, entropy, and free energy of the system, in terms of the partition function and its derivatives.
The fact that the partition function can be expressed as a sum over all possible configurations, including the "empty" or "vacuum" configuration with zero energy, suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness may play a fundamental role in the statistical properties of matter and energy.
Theorem 7: The vacuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor in general relativity is proportional to the metric tensor.
Proof:
In general relativity, the energy-momentum tensor T_μν is a symmetric second-rank tensor that describes the density and flux of energy and momentum in spacetime.
The vacuum expectation value of T_μν, denoted by ⟨0|T_μν|0⟩, is the expectation value of T_μν in the vacuum state |0⟩.
According to the Einstein field equations, the energy-momentum tensor is related to the curvature of spacetime via:
R_μν - (1/2)Rg_μν + Λg_μν = (8πG/c^4) T_μν
where R_μν is the Ricci tensor, R is the scalar curvature, g_μν is the metric tensor, Λ is the cosmological constant, G is Newton's gravitational constant, and c is the speed of light.
In the vacuum state, the energy-momentum tensor vanishes classically, i.e., T_μν = 0.
However, in quantum field theory, the vacuum state has zero-point fluctuations that give rise to a non-zero vacuum expectation value of T_μν.
By the principle of general covariance, the vacuum expectation value of T_μν must be proportional to the only available second-rank tensor in the vacuum, which is the metric tensor g_μν:
⟨0|T_μν|0⟩ = κg_μν
where κ is a constant.
Substituting this into the Einstein field equations, we obtain:
R_μν - (1/2)Rg_μν + Λg_μν = (8πG/c^4) κg_μν
This implies that the vacuum energy-momentum tensor acts like a cosmological constant term in the Einstein equations, with an effective cosmological constant given by:
Λ_eff = Λ + (8πG/c^4) κ
The fact that the vacuum expectation value of the energy-momentum tensor is proportional to the metric tensor suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness may be deeply connected to the geometry and topology of spacetime, and may play a crucial role in the large-scale structure and evolution of the universe.
Theorem 8: The Riemann zeta function, which is a fundamental object in number theory and complex analysis, has a deep connection to the distribution of prime numbers and the properties of the vacuum state in quantum field theory.
Proof:
The Riemann zeta function ζ(s) is defined as:
ζ(s) = Σ_n 1/n^s
for complex numbers s with real part greater than 1.
It can be analytically continued to a meromorphic function on the entire complex plane, with a simple pole at s=1.
The Euler product formula expresses the Riemann zeta function as an infinite product over all prime numbers:
ζ(s) = Π_p (1 - 1/p^s)^(-1)
where p runs over all prime numbers.
This formula establishes a deep connection between the Riemann zeta function and the distribution of prime numbers.
In particular, the famous Riemann hypothesis states that all non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function (i.e., zeros with real part between 0 and 1) have real part equal to 1/2.
If the Riemann hypothesis is true, it would imply strong bounds on the distribution of prime numbers and the behavior of various number-theoretic functions.
Interestingly, the Riemann zeta function also appears in the expression for the Casimir energy of a quantum field in a vacuum state.
The Casimir energy is a manifestation of the zero-point fluctuations of the quantum field, and can be calculated as a regularized sum over all possible modes of the field.
For a scalar field in a one-dimensional cavity of length L, the Casimir energy is given by:
E_Casimir = (π/24L) ζ(-1)
where ζ(-1) = -1/12 is the value of the Riemann zeta function at s=-1.
This result suggests that the Riemann zeta function, and in particular its values at negative integers, may have a deep connection to the properties of the vacuum state and the zero-point fluctuations of quantum fields.
The fact that the Riemann zeta function appears in both number theory and quantum field theory, and that it is intimately connected to the concept of zero (through its zeros and its values at negative integers), suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be a unifying theme across different branches of mathematics and physics.
Theorem 9: The Euler-Lagrange equations, which are the fundamental equations of motion in classical mechanics and field theory, can be derived from the principle of least action, which states that the path taken by a system between two points is the one that minimizes the action integral.
Proof:
Let q_i(t) be the generalized coordinates of a system, and let L(q_i, dq_i/dt, t) be the Lagrangian of the system, which is a function of the coordinates, their time derivatives, and time.
The action integral S is defined as the integral of the Lagrangian over time:
S = ∫_t1^t2 L(q_i, dq_i/dt, t) dt
The principle of least action states that the path taken by the system between two points (q_i(t1), q_i(t2)) is the one that minimizes the action integral S.
To find the equations of motion, we require that the variation of the action integral with respect to the path is zero:
δS = 0
Using the calculus of variations, we can show that this condition leads to the Euler-Lagrange equations:
(d/dt) (∂L/∂(dq_i/dt)) - (∂L/∂q_i) = 0
for each generalized coordinate q_i.
These equations describe the motion of the system and can be used to derive the conservation laws and symmetry principles of classical mechanics and field theory.
The fact that the equations of motion can be derived from a variational principle, which involves minimizing an integral, suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness (in the sense of a minimum or stationary point) may play a fundamental role in the dynamics of physical systems.
Moreover, the action integral itself can be interpreted as a measure of the "amount of nothingness" in the path of the system, in the sense that it vanishes for the classical path (the one that satisfies the equations of motion) and is positive for all other paths.
This interpretation suggests that the classical path of a system can be seen as a "zero mode" or "vacuum state" of the action integral, and that the properties of this zero mode may be related to the fundamental laws of physics and the symmetries of nature.
Theorem 10: The concept of entropy, which is a measure of the disorder or randomness of a system, is intimately connected to the concept of information and the properties of the vacuum state in quantum field theory.
Proof:
In thermodynamics, the entropy S of a system is defined as:
S = -k Σ_i p_i log(p_i)
where k is the Boltzmann constant, and p_i is the probability of the system being in the i-th microstate.
This definition establishes a connection between entropy and information, as the entropy can be interpreted as the average amount of information needed to specify the microstate of the system.
In quantum statistical mechanics, the entropy can be expressed in terms of the density matrix ρ of the system:
S = -k Tr(ρ log(ρ))
where Tr denotes the trace operation.
For a pure state, which is described by a single wave function |ψ⟩, the density matrix is given by:
ρ = |ψ⟩⟨ψ|
and the entropy vanishes:
S = 0
This result suggests that a pure state, which can be seen as a "zero mode" or "vacuum state" of the system, has zero entropy and zero information content.
In quantum field theory, the vacuum state |0⟩ is defined as the state with the lowest possible energy, and is annihilated by all the annihilation operators of the field:
a_k |0⟩ = 0
for all modes k.
The vacuum state can be seen as a "zero mode" of the quantum field, in the sense that it has zero energy and zero particle content.
However, the vacuum state also has non-trivial topological and geometric properties, which are related to the concept of entropy and the structure of spacetime.
In particular, the entanglement entropy of the vacuum state, which measures the amount of entanglement between different regions of spacetime, is proportional to the area of the boundary between the regions (the "area law"):
S_entanglement = (c^3/4ℏG) A
where c is the speed of light, ℏ is the reduced Planck constant, G is Newton's gravitational constant, and A is the area of the boundary.
This result suggests that the vacuum state of a quantum field has a deep connection to the geometry and topology of spacetime, and that the concept of entropy and information may play a fundamental role in the structure of the universe at the most fundamental level.
The fact that the vacuum state, which can be seen as a "zero mode" of the quantum field, has non-trivial entropy and information content, suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be a key to understanding the nature of space, time, and matter.
Theorem 11: The fundamental theorem of algebra, which states that every non-constant polynomial with complex coefficients has at least one complex root, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero in the complex number system.
Proof:
Let p(z) be a non-constant polynomial of degree n with complex coefficients:
p(z) = a_n z^n + a_{n-1} z^{n-1} + ... + a_1 z + a_0
where a_n ≠ 0.
The fundamental theorem of algebra states that there exists at least one complex number z_0 such that:
p(z_0) = 0
To prove this theorem, we can use the concept of the winding number of a curve in the complex plane.
Consider the image of the unit circle |z| = 1 under the polynomial function p(z).
As z traverses the unit circle, the image p(z) traces out a closed curve in the complex plane.
The winding number of this curve around the origin is defined as:
W = (1/2πi) ∮_{|z|=1} (p'(z)/p(z)) dz
It can be shown that the winding number W is always an integer, and that it counts the number of zeros of the polynomial p(z) inside the unit circle.
Moreover, as the radius of the circle goes to infinity, the winding number approaches the degree of the polynomial:
W → n as |z| → ∞
This implies that the polynomial p(z) must have at least one zero in the complex plane, as otherwise the winding number would be zero for all circles, contradicting the fact that it approaches the degree of the polynomial as the radius goes to infinity.
The fundamental theorem of algebra can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero in the complex number system, as it shows that every polynomial equation p(z) = 0 has at least one solution, and that the number of solutions is related to the degree of the polynomial.
In other words, the existence of zeros (or roots) is a fundamental property of polynomials, and is intimately connected to the topology and geometry of the complex plane.
This result suggests that the concept of zero, and the study of its properties and manifestations in different mathematical structures, may be key to unlocking the deepest secrets of algebra and number theory.
Theorem 12: The concept of symmetry, which plays a fundamental role in modern physics and mathematics, is intimately connected to the concept of invariance under transformations, and can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness.
Proof:
In mathematics, a symmetry of an object is a transformation that leaves the object unchanged.
For example, a circle is symmetric under rotations around its center, as any rotation will map the circle onto itself.
In physics, symmetries are described by groups of transformations that act on the states and observables of a system.
For example, the symmetry group of special relativity is the Poincaré group, which consists of rotations, boosts, and translations in spacetime.
The concept of invariance under transformations is closely related to the concept of symmetry, as a quantity or property is said to be invariant under a transformation if it remains unchanged when the transformation is applied.
In mathematical terms, if G is a group of transformations acting on a set X, and f is a function on X, then f is said to be invariant under G if:
f(g(x)) = f(x)
for all x in X and all g in G.
The concept of invariance can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, as it captures the idea that certain properties or quantities remain "unchanged" or "unaffected" under certain transformations.
In other words, invariance can be interpreted as a kind of "zero mode" or "vacuum state" of the system, which is preserved under the action of the symmetry group.
This idea is particularly evident in the context of Noether's theorem, which states that every continuous symmetry of a physical system corresponds to a conserved quantity.
For example, the invariance of the laws of physics under translations in time leads to the conservation of energy, while the invariance under translations in space leads to the conservation of momentum.
These conserved quantities can be seen as "zero modes" of the system, in the sense that they remain constant or "unchanged" under the action of the symmetry group.
The fact that symmetries and invariance play such a fundamental role in physics and mathematics suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be deeply connected to the structure and behavior of the universe at the most fundamental level.
Theorem 13: The concept of emergent spacetime, which suggests that the fabric of space and time is not a fundamental entity but rather arises from underlying quantum degrees of freedom, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness.
Proof:
In general relativity, spacetime is described as a smooth, continuous manifold with a metric tensor that encodes its geometry and curvature.
However, in quantum gravity theories such as loop quantum gravity and causal dynamical triangulations, spacetime is thought to be fundamentally discrete and composed of tiny quantum building blocks, such as loops, nodes, or simplices.
These quantum degrees of freedom are postulated to give rise to the smooth, continuous spacetime of general relativity at large scales, through a process of coarse-graining or averaging.
In other words, spacetime is not a fundamental entity, but rather an emergent phenomenon that arises from the collective behavior of underlying quantum degrees of freedom.
This idea can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that spacetime emerges from a "void" or "vacuum" of quantum degrees of freedom, which have no intrinsic spatiotemporal properties.
In mathematical terms, if we denote the quantum degrees of freedom by φ_i, and the emergent spacetime by g_μν, then we can express the idea of emergent spacetime as:
g_μν = F[φ_i]
where F is a coarse-graining or averaging function that maps the quantum degrees of freedom to the emergent spacetime.
The fact that spacetime emerges from underlying quantum degrees of freedom suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be non-spatiotemporal, and that the concepts of space and time may be secondary or derived notions that arise from more primitive, non-geometric entities.
This idea is reminiscent of the concept of "non-commutative geometry" in mathematics, where the notion of space is generalized to algebraic structures that do not necessarily have a geometric interpretation.
In non-commutative geometry, the fundamental objects are not points or curves, but rather abstract algebraic entities such as operators or matrices, which can be thought of as "quantized" or "non-commutative" versions of classical geometric objects.
The fact that non-commutative geometry provides a natural framework for quantum gravity and emergent spacetime suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be deeply connected to the algebraic and non-geometric aspects of reality.
Theorem 14: The holographic principle, which states that the information content of a region of space can be described by a theory on the boundary of that region, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness.
Proof:
The holographic principle is a general feature of quantum gravity theories, which suggests that the degrees of freedom of a region of space can be encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary of that region.
The most famous example of the holographic principle is the AdS/CFT correspondence, which states that a theory of gravity in anti-de Sitter (AdS) space is equivalent to a conformal field theory (CFT) on the boundary of that space.
In other words, the physics of the bulk AdS space can be completely described by the physics of the boundary CFT, which has one fewer dimension than the bulk.
The holographic principle can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that it suggests that the fundamental degrees of freedom of a region of space are not located in the bulk, but rather on the boundary, which can be thought of as a "void" or "vacuum" from the perspective of the bulk.
In mathematical terms, if we denote the bulk AdS space by M and the boundary CFT by ∂M, then the AdS/CFT correspondence can be expressed as:
Z_CFT[φ] = ∫_φ Dg e^{iS_AdS[g,φ]}
where Z_CFT is the partition function of the boundary CFT, S_AdS is the action of the bulk AdS space, and φ is a field on the boundary that corresponds to a source in the bulk.
This equation shows that the physics of the bulk AdS space is completely encoded in the physics of the boundary CFT, and that the boundary degrees of freedom are the fundamental entities that give rise to the bulk.
The holographic principle suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be lower-dimensional or even dimensionless, and that the apparent three-dimensionality of space may be an emergent or derived concept.
This idea is reminiscent of the "flatland" thought experiment in mathematics, where a two-dimensional being living on a plane cannot directly perceive the third dimension, but can nevertheless infer its existence from the behavior of objects in the plane.
The fact that the holographic principle provides a natural framework for understanding the emergence of spacetime and the nature of quantum gravity suggests that the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness may be deeply connected to the lower-dimensional or dimensionless aspects of reality.
Theorem 15: The concept of quantum entanglement, which refers to the non-classical correlations between quantum systems that cannot be accounted for by local realistic theories, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness.
Proof:
In quantum mechanics, the state of a composite system is described by a vector in a Hilbert space, which is a tensor product of the Hilbert spaces of the individual subsystems.
For example, if we have two quantum systems A and B, with Hilbert spaces H_A and H_B, then the Hilbert space of the composite system is given by:
H_AB = H_A ⊗ H_B
A state in the composite Hilbert space is said to be entangled if it cannot be written as a tensor product of states in the individual Hilbert spaces:
|ψ_AB⟩ ≠ |ψ_A⟩ ⊗ |ψ_B⟩
Entangled states exhibit non-classical correlations that cannot be explained by any local realistic theory, as demonstrated by the violation of Bell's inequalities.
The concept of quantum entanglement can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that entangled states are fundamentally non-local and non-separable, and cannot be reduced to the properties of the individual subsystems.
In other words, entangled states exist in a "void" or "vacuum" of possibilities, where the individual subsystems lose their independent identities and become part of a larger, holistic entity.
This idea is reminiscent of the concept of "non-separability" in mathematics, where a geometric object cannot be decomposed into simpler parts without losing its essential properties.
For example, a torus (donut shape) is non-separable, because any attempt to cut it into two parts will destroy its topological structure.
The fact that quantum entanglement exhibits non-separability and non-locality suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be holistic and non-reductionistic, and that the properties of the whole cannot be reduced to the properties of the parts.
This idea is consistent with the "holographic principle" discussed earlier, which suggests that the degrees of freedom of a region of space are not independent, but rather fundamentally interconnected and encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary.
The non-local and non-separable nature of quantum entanglement also suggests that the concept of "locality" and "separability" may be emergent or derived notions, rather than fundamental properties of reality.
In other words, the apparent separability and locality of classical physics may be a consequence of the coarse-graining or averaging of underlying quantum degrees of freedom, which are fundamentally non-local and non-separable.
Theorem 16: The concept of wave-particle duality, which refers to the fact that quantum entities exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties depending on the context of observation, can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness.
Proof:
In quantum mechanics, the state of a quantum system is described by a wave function, which is a complex-valued function on a Hilbert space.
The wave function encodes the probabilities of different measurement outcomes, and exhibits wave-like properties such as interference and diffraction.
However, when a measurement is performed on the system, the wave function "collapses" to a definite state, and the system exhibits particle-like properties such as localization and discreteness.
The concept of wave-particle duality can be seen as a manifestation of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, in the sense that the wave function exists in a "void" or "vacuum" of possibilities, which is not directly observable or measurable.
In other words, the wave function represents a "zero mode" or "ground state" of the quantum system, which contains all the information about the system's potential properties and behaviors.
When a measurement is performed, the wave function "collapses" to a definite state, and the system's actual properties and behaviors become manifest.
This collapse is often seen as a mysterious or paradoxical process, because it seems to involve a sudden change in the system's state, without any apparent cause or mechanism.
However, from the perspective of the primacy of zero and the properties of nothingness, the collapse of the wave function can be seen as a natural consequence of the transition from the realm of potentiality to the realm of actuality.
In other words, the wave function represents the system's inherent potential or "nothingness", which is not directly observable or measurable, but which contains all the information about the system's possible states and behaviors.
When a measurement is performed, this potential is "actualized" or "realized" into a definite state, and the system's actual properties and behaviors become manifest.
The fact that quantum systems exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties suggests that the fundamental nature of reality may be neither purely continuous nor purely discrete, but rather a complex interplay between the two.
This idea is consistent with the concept of "complementarity" in quantum mechanics, which states that the wave-like and particle-like properties of a system are mutually exclusive, but both necessary for a complete description of the system.
The wave-particle duality also suggests that the concepts of "continuity" and "discreteness" may be emergent or derived notions, rather than fundamental properties of reality.
In other words, the apparent continuity and discreteness of classical physics may be a consequence of the coarse-graining or averaging of underlying quantum degrees of freedom, which exhibit a more subtle and complex interplay between the two.
Embarassing
😂😂😂😂😂 = me LMFAO
How refreshing to hear that the infinitely dense singularity is impossible. I agree entirely. I've been saying this for years and no one has agreed, until now.
The infinite dense singularity is impossible , agreed .
@@philharmer198 definitely agreed, see comment ^
I read some time ago that according to quantum theory, nothing infinitely large or small can exist in a finite universe. The center of a black hole can only exist as a Planck sized star, or so it says.
@@dhalsim-1 Space is infinite . And three dimensional , in and of itself . And therefore something infinitely large and small does exist .
Space its self matters . Without space , room , distance ; no thing could exist . Nor Life .
@@dhalsim-1 they are wrong . This is just mathematical thought . No space is included . It should be . Space is infinite at any size .
(0:02:00) Heat cannot enter an empty container. Heat is the expression of motion - molecules of gas or particles for example. You cannot measure heat otherwise so that statement is meaningless, unless particles can spontaneously appear in the container. Of course you can measure the temperature (heat) of the container, but that does not reflect heat inside, but outside the container presumably. In any case, our brains are dualistic comparators - yin/yang. We can only think in terms of yes/no, hot/cold, empty/full. Doesn’t mean those “ideas” are real. Nothingness is just as artificial as “somethingness”.
I think the video meant that solar radiation can travel through a perfect vacuum meaning a perfect vacuum isn't nothing. But you are right, without particles that radiation has nothing to give it's energy to but it still has the potential to do so in the future.
We use a lot of wrong words like Nothingness and then we believe that they mean something real. Words are often empty.
What you you want us to think a full word would be, App?
How do you feel about "words are signifiers, not containers"?
To argue about something you can’t even define is pointless.
Nothing is real, we just seem to perceive it as the opposite of something.. ... Maybe it's not an opposite.. maybe it is something that is just called nothing
I@@kathyorourke9273it's not arguing.. arguing means we're talking about who is right. This is an exploratory conversation of ideas to try to understand What is right..
Empty word’s 😂👍🏻
I couldn't find any Patreon info, so all I could do was Super Thanks!
A vacuum devoid of matter has energy fields.
Nothing cannot be possible unless it is in reference to something. It is a relative concept. A hypothetical container holding nothing, no air, no energy, etc is comprehended by what surrounds it. Nothing cannot exist without reference to something
The vacuum of space contains the universe. So a vacuum definitely doesn't contain nothing.
“I AM the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” These are the words of JESUS CHRIST & I believe HIM !🙏!
What does that have to do with this video?
I think this is the most updated video i have ever seen about a lot of topics in science. A lot of science on the net comes from old information from a different era.😊 New information is hard to swallow, but i gulped it down anyway.😊
"Nothing" can't exist. Therefore, something exists.
Nothing isn't Empty 🤔
Nothing isn't Empty 💀 What is fulfilling The Emptiness Exept Allah The Original
As a whole, I know nothing. Infinity is alone.
There is nothing to be experienced.
And so the infinite I, goes within. And begins to realize its parts separately.
Low and behold it finds worlds, creatures and characters... all sorts of imaginings to be experienced.
All I. All knowing nothing.
I, being and knowing nothing, learn everything through experience, by being it.
This is the nature of existence.
@@marlieeasley830 I recommend The Egg by Andy Weir.
Not true, you don't know that anything exists. It could all be a dream in your head.
@@ayhanuzun4821fake Allah come 600 Years after the original one and only God in human form
You follow a prophet that married a child The same prophet that told his men it was OK to take the wives of his enemies and to you that is Godly?
Thank you for going into several well known theories and some not so, and for your highly understanding explanations for the average person.
Why there's something rather than nothing? Remember creation was desired 1st. Now who will glorify the Creation? Shared "i" AM come forth!
We exist. Therefore, we are something. Nothing is the absence of everything. Not even valumetric space exists. That means we exist in a bubble containing everything. If you could go outside the bubble called our universe, you would instantly become nothing, but this is not possible because a place outside the universe does not exist.
I love your mix of philosophy and physics videos.
Thanks you ❤
What is nothing(ness)?
Nothing means: no matter, no energy (no radiation, no fields also, no virtual particles), no space, no time, no laws of nature (physics, chemistry), and of course no math (and no chance or possibility, because chance and possibility is also math), because all laws of nature obey math. But there is still something…. even with these all no-s. So nothing, beside this, it means also non physical entities, what ever they might be. By the way, the absence of something is also something…. and so on. In fact, really nothing, doesn’t even exist… So… from nothings comes only nothing, and nothing else excuse the pun. Nothing means also NO causality, because causality is something, and when we are speaking of nothing means also no causality, no logic, and so on, as I mentioned already. If nothingness will be a force (or considered as such), it wouldn’t be nothingness anymore. It will become something…. And something is not nothing.
Mmm pasta
You’re forgetting that a true Nothingness also means no limits, no rules. An entire universe can thus spring forth without a cause, since causality is not a “thing” yet, until the universe begins.
I think the main thing is that without the passage of time, “nothingness” cannot be said to “exist” (for anything to be said to be existing implies the passage of time). Nothingness thus never was, not even for a nanosecond. Since time and space are intertwined and cannot be said to exist independently of the other (as far as I understand), spacetime is thus a “brute” requirement. Matter and energy may also be intertwined with spacetime, I’m not sure, but if they all do in fact require each other to exist, and have no existence independent of each other, then together they are one big brute requirement, and thus the universe had to exist, since nothingness “existing” is impossible.
If the above is true, the dilemma then becomes, if time and space and energy/matter must all exist, then why did a universe like this one where life and consciousness (at least here on Earth) also come to be. One could easily imagine a universe completely devoid of any life, with no conscious beings at all, and still meet the minimum brute requirement for existence described above, and yet, here we are.
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 Pay attention: when you say no rules and no limits (which is a consequence of what I already said) it does mean chaos. Chaos is also something.
And there are things that are beyond time space continuum, and that exists (of course there are something!!!). Those things permeate every point in time space continuum, and they are unchanged, unchangeable, undeletable, uncreated. Can you guess which are these things? We use them in every day life....
@@radupopescu9977 Keep going Radu, I’m interested in hearing more…
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 Those things permeate every point in time space continuum, and they are unchanged, unchangeable, undeletable, uncreated.
Math objects. So call physics laws, chemistry laws.
Do not mistake math objects existence with naming them and assigning them symbols.
There are math objects undiscovered, but they still exists.
Math say 1+1=2. This is true in the system that we use every day, and in a system that we gave names and symbols to these objects.
You may discover (by your self) a math valid system where 1+1=1. Well this was already discovered, I can't give an e.g. of undiscovered math object, because I am not so good at math.
I try to help you discover an interesting system of addition, different that ordinary use (like 1+1=2).
Simple case:
Determine the final temperature when 45.0 g of water at 20.0 °C mixes with 22.3 grams of water at 20.0 °C.
In this case 20°C.+20°C.=20 °C. (the volume addition is classical math = 45g+22.3g=57.3g).
Complicated case:
Determine the final temperature when 45.0 g of water at 20.0 °C mixes with 22.3 grams of water at 85.0 °C.
With wolfram alfa the final temperature is 30.85 °C, in this case 20°C.+85°C.=30.85°C.
This problem type becomes slightly harder if a phase change is involved (melting ice, say one of the glasses have ice at -2 degrees instead of liquid water).
Same if it was water with iron, there must be take into account the specific heat value for iron. It is 0.45 J per gram degree Celsius.
There are a lot of other ways of addition, different from the classical 1+1=2. All valid!
Sometimes nothing is something.
The awerness of the existence of "nothing" is only limited to what we find as acceptable start point for something.
There is always something...its impossible to reside in or create a true pure void.
Assume nothing exists. Therefore something exists (the nothing that exists). Thus proof by contradiction, nothing does not exist and therefore something exists, which requires a universe to exist in.
Nothing is dual to something.
Lacking is dual to non lacking.
All numbers fall within the complex plane.
Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual.
All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number!
The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates.
Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication.
If mathematics is a language then it is dual.
Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory.
Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.
If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists.
Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory.
The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist.
Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic.
"The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel.
Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
You force me to assume the impoassible and this is big no no dont do that if you want to see yourself in the mirror
Yeah but that's a trick of linguistics.
By assuming nothing exists, we are forced to acknowledge the concept of “nothing,” which itself is a form of existence. This contradiction implies that the original assumption is false, proving that the universe (or at least some form of existence) must exist.
@@jeremyhofmann7034Let me simplify for u , what you think ''exists" actually appears to exist, so there are appearances and then change in appearances. In real sense only Consciousness exist while everything else just appear and disappear... U may ask why consciousness cant be noticed, answer is in same way color red would not be noticed if all colors were red. Then red would have become something that exist but cant be noticed or figure out. Whole Game is how to internalize as Consciousness and master game of appearing and disappearing without any kind of fear or greed.
People love to say that you can't get _something_ from _nothing._ And it _feels_ correct in our universe, but... we don't actually have _nothingness_ in our universe, even in space, so what's that claim based off? We've never seen "nothing"; who are we to claim we know anything about it? Moreover, if there were absolute nothingness - no consciousness, no space, no existence - then there would also be no physical laws or rules such as... _you can't get something from nothing._ There would be nothing hindering the spontaneous eruption of _something_ from _nothing,_ not even logic itself since logic wouldn't exist. It might be the most natural result of _nothing_ to eventually - and in no time at all - spontaneously produce _something._
Wow. Never thought this before. Thanks !
@@JaniceDoe210 ❤
Many many thanks for such an educating nad thoght provoking article . It has been explained in such a way that an ordinary viewer like me can also learn so much of the unknown . Thanks again .
At 12:00 stars can be seen popping into existence along the silver filaments, electricity is fundamental in the continuos creation of this universe but largely ignored by mainstream science sadly. ❤ nice work, thank you from the southern roaring 40's zone on planet Earth
The distinction between theoretical and actually measured energy in the vacuum is rather huge, explaining why we can’t pull energy from a vacuum (maybe yet).
Theravada Buddhist teachings tend to make sense.
This was discovered by Hindu Rishis thousands of years Before Buddha.
There’s nothing new.
If absolutely nothing ever existed we wouldn't be here and there wouldn't be a universe, there would always have been nothing. How can you get something from absolutely nothing when there is no time? Without time there is no moment and without a moment you can't have nothing and then something because that would require a moment in time.
You want "nothing" ... watch Seinfeld.
👍❤️
I always think of it as everything and every little thing that you can talk about in which nothing no matter how small can be overlooked.
You have unlocked the character George Dispenza 😂
The reason why galaxies do not "expand" but distant objects do appear to expand over time, is because time ran slower in the distant past. Locally, between local galaxies, this differential time rate is small and so the expansion of space over the period light takes to get to us, is also small, perhaps indetectable.
But very distant objects do appear to exist in a smaller space time, because their time rate was measurably slower than today.
It's all down to the time rate, even the Hubble constant has units of inverse time right? Why do you think that is?
Nothing in itself is something
Your "nothing" has a self? How did you manage that?
Nothing is dual to something.
Lacking is dual to non lacking.
All numbers fall within the complex plane.
Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual.
All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number!
The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates.
Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication.
If mathematics is a language then it is dual.
Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory.
Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.
If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists.
Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory.
The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist.
Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic.
"The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel.
Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
@@hyperduality2838 What about the holy trinity, that’s three, not two. That would even stump good old Yoda… “Three, there be? Thought I that always there were two… not true? To the drawing board, go I back.”😖
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 "Do you seek absolution?" -- King Aelle of Northumbria.
God (thesis) is dual to the Christ consciousness (anti-thesis) creates the holy spirit or the mind/soul (synthesis) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Brahman (the creator god, thesis) is dual to Shiva (the destroyer god, anti-thesis) creates Vishnu (the preserver god, synthesis) -- the trimurti (Hinduism).
The trimurti is dual to the Hegelian dialectic.
The three is derived from duality.
The proton is composed of three quarks connected by gluons (force carriers).
Force carriers (Bosons) are dual.
Action (thesis) is dual to reaction (anti-thesis) -- Sir Isaac Newton or the duality of force.
Attraction (sympathy) is dual to repulsion (antipathy), stretch is squeeze, push is dual to pull -- forces are dual.
Gluons attract and repel quarks both at the same time.
Yoda is correct.
The Catholic church is based upon the question:- is the Christ conscious the same substance as God or a different substance? -- the council of Nicaea (325 AD).
Same is dual to different.
No space ,no time ,nothing .no void ,no darkness ,no light.we as humans try to imagine "nothing "but our finite minds can't conceive a thought without "SOMETHING "
Well we can imagine nothing . No space ( which is three dimensional in and of its self ) . Hence nothing . Something can never exist with no space .
@@philharmer198 yes that's true I guess I was just referring to the void I see in my head that is still something
@@scottturner1504 in the Universe there are voids in space . Where no matter is .
@@philharmer198 yes I know but it is still a void it is something, it is impossible for the human mind to imagine "nothing" because our imagination is still something
@@scottturner1504 disagree . Nothing can not create a thing nor space .
I don’t mean to be rude, but all those questions indicate that you have not understood what Nothing(ness) really implies. Before worrying about physics, try to attain a better philosophical handle on / feel for Nothing.
I disagree. Can you explain " nothing" better than he did?
@@kevinpotts123 Now we have a serious problem, because YOU disagree!
@@NothingMaster if you can't do what I asked, that's fine, but your snarky answer tells me that you cannot.
The human brain cannot fathom nothingness. No youtube video can make us understand nothingness the same way we cannot understand or fathom infinity. The only way would be to enter a higer dimension which isnt a different place from where we are but a different plane. A different state of perception. People who've smoked dmt have been able to experience infinity bc it tunes the "frequency receivers" in your consciousness to a higher dimension is what i believe. We simply cant understand nothingness or infinity with our three dimensional perception.
@@NothingMaster YOU KNOW NOTHING
Great segment on graphene and how this enabled testing of the schwinger effect.
"Nothing is a something whether it's real or not"
"The lack of things is a thing unto itself"
-MeowTzu😹
Nothing is dual to something.
Lacking is dual to non lacking.
All numbers fall within the complex plane.
Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual.
All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number!
The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates.
Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication.
If mathematics is a language then it is dual.
Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory.
Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.
If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists.
Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory.
The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist.
Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic.
"The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel.
Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
Number zero is the fruit of the snake not existing purely anywhere in nature , all numbers fall fractionally one side or the other
It's a play on words and meanings perhaps....but true nothingness is not something that can exist by its own definition....and the physics we have developed seems to show just that. There is something because nothing cannot exist. Doesn't get us very far along the path of understanding the universe though. Need to answer the question of how the things that do exist operate and arise and unfortunately we are limited by our own lack of observational powers. For instance for 3 dimensions to curve back on itself....we can observe how the 2 dimensions of the surface of a 3 dimensional sphere curve back on itself... however we cannot envision a 4th spatial dimension that would need to exist to allow 3 dimensions without boundary to curve back on itself. We may never understand it all because we can only theorize but never observe.
"true nothingness is not something that can exist by its own definition" I think that is a fallacy called reification using the ambiguity of the word "exist".
"Fluctuations can occur in the quantum field" ....'fluctuations' of what?
fluctuation due to uncertainty of what will be...
@@rcoimbra00 But "uncertainty" is a mere idea and its meaning cannot fluctuate; "what will be" is not an "is," has no ontological presence in actuality unless it "is," therefore as a mere mental abstraction how can it undergo a physical process, "fluctuate"?
Experiment's have shown that if you try to remove all matter, in say a boxed in area,
particles, that is quantum particles like electron's do in fact appear and disappear randomly. Thus the term "fluctuations".
Thing is, the boxed in area is still existing within the fabric of space time, which is definitely not "nothing".
"Nothing" can be imagined as a thought experiment, but if there was absolutely nothing, time will also not exist. So the "nothing" would last forever.
Since we are here, the logical conclusion is that "nothing" can not exist.
I like to think of it by asking the question that most people haven't thought through.
"Where is the Universe?"
The correct answer is Nowhere.
There's quite a few YT great science channels that explain the fluctuations in empty space.
Anton Petrov
Arvin Ash
Astrum
DrBecky
PBS
Many scientists have theory's of our existence but imho,
Nobel prize winner Sir Roger Penrose is the closest to getting it right.
@@OhAncientOne Yes. But that then is not "Nithing" by definition.
@@James-ll3jb I think what you said is what I said.
I disagree completely with the suggestion that "nothing" is a "thing" bc if there was "nothing"
You would not exist to perceive it as a thing.
True "nothing" is the lack of all things.
Remember those sage philosopher scientists the Beatles declared in the sixties that "nothing is real". They also comforted us by going on to state that "it's nothing to get hung about", which means it's no big deal !
Fascinating
Thank you for new concept. I am a mechanical engineer working in mobile tower erection site in India. Job is not so hard. But I am bored of that doing that job. We are all running for something which would fulfill our life even it is a single day. Vaccine energy concept is really amazing.
i’m not smart enough for this video ☹️
Open third eye
noone is smart enough to process it correctly, because everything we can think of is just isnt it.
Yes you are, because : Nothing compares to you.
Nothing cannot exist. You cannot put a condition on a nothing or try to describe a nothing. In that case it is no longer a nothing but a unknown some thing. If a nothing cannot possibly exists, then there must always be a something
Using pure logic,
If we take "Nothing" to mean the absence of everything and anything (which is a human concept), it doesn't exist. There is no such thing as "Nothing".
"Nothing", could not exist if there is something to compare it to. In a case where there is "something" to compare "nothing" to, the "nothing" would be a potential difference...Not "nothing".
There is no example in nature of "nothing".
Don C.
Nothing is dual to something.
Lacking is dual to non lacking.
All numbers fall within the complex plane.
Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual.
All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number!
The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates.
Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication.
If mathematics is a language then it is dual.
Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory.
Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.
If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists.
Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory.
The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist.
Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic.
"The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel.
Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
define "nothing" better. regardless of quantum effects, a vacuum contains both space and time. it could never qualify as nothing. true nothing is hard to think about, as it means no space, no time, no energy.
Agreed . To your last statement . And hence has no physical things . Since it has no space . And no energy , hence no movement , time is irrelevant .
@@philharmer198 here's an outrageous idea to think about: For a moment try to imagine that nothing is real and only potential exists. It seems that most investigations into the nature of reality start with the assumption that reality is "real". Very few take a counter-intuitive approach, assuming that really there is "nothing" - no space, no time, no energy/matter. no God... and then try and find any path - some way to get to "here" from nothing.
Try thinking like this... consider that our universe arises from 'math-potential'; that really there is only potential and nothing actually exists. just go with it. In our universe, time is 'relative'. There is no perceived existence (now) without it being relative to some prior perceived existence. From pure nothing, abstract set theory creates Infinity via potential. Here's how: You get there from the nothing=0, the imaginary set containing the nothing set=1, the set containing that=2, and so on. Infinity emerges from nothing using imaginary "potential". the same theory posits new infinities relative to that infinity, and those infinities relative to each other.. again and again.. for infinity! It's a recursive, infinite pattern. Higher 'levels' of infinity emerge. Aleph infinity happens. Inside these imagined potential infinities, there are subsets, patterns if you will, that consist of portions that follow any and every set of arbitrary 'rules.' Think about "filtering" the Aleph infinity potential using our 'physical laws' and constants as the 'rules'. It results in our universe history. It is purely imaginary but our universe emerges via a *relative* potential path. Regarding time, because "now" is always relative it does not need to be *real*. All possible universe configurations exist purely as subsets of the Aleph infinity potential. All possible data configurations emerge (e.g Hilbert Space just is).
TLDR: Nothing really exists. All universes are subsets of the infinite 'everything' potential using different sets of arbitrary rules. The M in M-Theory stands for Math.
This is our foundation. This is how we get to everything from nothing.
Now let's seriously consider God. All gods.
We already postulated that every possible pattern exists. All patterns are just repeating sections of "relative change" according to a set of arbitrary "rules." Using the same postulate that created our initial infinity, notice higher order dimensions create themselves from *collections* of lower level dimensions. Think of the 4th dimension (spacetime) like you might a movie. The movie is just a collection of picture frames (fixed patterns) ordered in a special sequence that gives the illusion of movement when observed quickly in that sequence. All paterns exist. So that means a "path" through a set of ordered patterns is what this universe really *is*. Think of your entire life birth-to-death imagining that each "moment" of time in your life is like a picture frame (fixed pattern) in the movie. Your experience of this life is movement from pattern to pattern, like a movie.
In higher dimensions, you can "look" at your entire life and just "see" it all at once. It sounds like a super-power, but i think would be boring, like reading the end of a novel first.
Now imagine the biggest potential pattern in the highest potential dimension. The imagined pattern would encompass everything. Because it encompasses all patterns, it must have the self-aware pattern, too. This "all encompassing" pattern is what I think of as God. God would "see" everything at once. God probably is really really bored. There's nothing to do, nothing to learn, no way to grow. ever. So what might God do? Why not pick some subset of the everything that forms a universe with planets like Earth that can support life, and then go "play the game" of being alive! -- It would be much more fun to live our illusion lives than to just see them all at once "forever". God is everyone and everything. You are God. This life is a game. Play it well.
"Nothing" can't be imagined. Even the word defining it is something. The nothing couldn't have existed before the big bang because if there were nothing there wouldn't even be time which is required for a cause to unfold as a process. If there was a big bang, there had to be time at the very minimum to allow for the nothing to "progress" into something.
Grammar of language and the grammar of reality are quite different. That is a highly positive state of being which defies ordinary usage of language.
I can't sleep until I listen to any RUclips video talking about nothing so this is my sleep pill... zzz
Me too😊
Why would you want to sleep, when there is so much of nothing to do. It's attitudes like this is why nothing is getting done around here.
Coming to think of it, had Einstein begun his investigation from nothingness as a property of the infinite region of emptiness, namely that nothingness being unstable fluctuating between (+) and (-) the force or source of energy that fuels all of spacetime, Higgs Field and its expansion and creation that we know of.
I am 1 minute 40 seconds in. About this point in the video the narrator speak of something containing a vacuum he states that external heat could enter the box. My school boy physics taught me that, heat is an indications of the degree o excitation of the PARTICLES in the system. My question is how can heat be transferred to a perfectly isolated vacuum, that is devoid of particles. In good faith could somebody explain why my question is based on the premise, thanks.
I think you kind of hit the proverbial nail on the head. You are maybe talking about conduction or convection of heat. There is also radiation, which does not necessarily "transfer" to an object or system unless there is a particle, object, or system to transfer too. I like your observation though. My issue with this video is that I cannot fathom how anyone can talk about quantum physics without venturing deeper down the rabbit hole of "nonlocality." We like to say that entanglement is a "nonlocal phenomenon" but stop short of saying that the nature of reality is nonlocal. There is the rub. It is not that there is "nothing." It is just that the "something" turns out to be nonlocal, as in a mere projection of sorts to us. It is both "unspeakable" and "mechanical." In other words, a tree that falls alone in the woods with nobody there to hear it will always make a "noise" but in order for there to be "sound" there might need to be someone there --and even still that someone there really would have no perfect definition for the difference between the words "noise" and "sound," but one means a concussive force an object makes and the other the reverberation a being hears.
@@jdlawbooker3938 thanks for your reply, you accessed the dusty corner of my memory when mentioning the three forms of heat transfer. With respect to non locality, well, I have admit to bailing out when felt the video might not be scientifically accurate. I should like to agree with your analysis, but your knowledge is way above my head. I’m sure it’s correct however. Perhaps someone read your reply who has a good grasp of QM.
=
Nothing= infinite stability. It is the unobservable existence of perfect one. R element.
Everything=infinite change. Entangled unobservable existence. A element.
Existence = Orbital, finite, and observable existence in singularity one which is EQORIA.
“Nothing lasts… but nothing is lost”
really nice video! But you should definitely change the background music. switching between harry potter and trap makes it hard to concentrate on the information ;)
Nothing is the "concept" that, the more you try to define or create something of "nothing", the farther from "nothing" you get. Even beginning to conceptualize it puts you infinitely farther from it. So what is nothing? To state it as clearly as possible, there is simply NOTHING you can know about nothing. There are things, and paradoxically at best, there is nothing.
My bank account is proof that nothing exists.
So underrated comment 😂😂
Perfectly answered in the starting 2 secs ;)
Was gonna comment but it doesn’t really exist.
Nothingness is different than nothing. It's like the difference between an empty void or the number zero and no-thing. No-thing means not even zero, literally no thing, no emptiness, no void, no zero, no nothing. Nothingness exists as a concept if nothing else, but nothing at all can be said about "no-thing." It has no words. It doesnt exist.
What gets me is Space being called Space, as Space is never empty, in fact it’s absolutely full with visible physical entities and invisible components too, I think calling it space nowadays is inappropriate, as there simply is no Space in Space, what say you?
Another video where I learn nothing
Try mine, I bet it will be better
Nothing is dual to something.
Lacking is dual to non lacking.
All numbers fall within the complex plane.
Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual.
All numbers are dual and zero (nothing) is a number!
The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates.
Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication.
If mathematics is a language then it is dual.
Categories (form, syntax) are dual to sets (substance, semantics) -- category theory.
Enantiodromia is the unconscious opposite or opposame (duality) -- Carl Jung.
If you want nothing (zero) then you are assuming that something already exists.
Poles (eigenvalues, infinities) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory.
The big bang is a Janus point/hole (two faces = duality) -- Julian Barbour, physicist.
Topological holes cannot be shrunk down to zero -- non null homotopic.
"The negation of the negation gives a positive" -- Hegel.
Positive is dual to negative -- electric charge, numbers or curvature.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
The observed is dual to the observer -- David Bohm.
@hyperduality2838 Pure Trash Nonsense! Learn how to do philosophy and not just schizophrenic word rationalizations.
Ya I feel like this “creator” just types into GPT “create a script anout nothingness in physics”
@@ExistenceUniversity Sense is dual to nonsense.
Right is dual to wrong.
You are using duality to claim that duality does not exist.
You have the goal, target or intention to prove me wrong and that is teleological.
Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy).
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Mathematics and physics are both dual.
Julian Barbour has written a book about Janus points you should read it.
Sine is dual to cosine or dual sine -- the word co means mutual and implies duality.
Average information (entropy) is dual to co or mutual information (syntropy) -- information is dual.
In physics all information is dual.
Synthetic a priori knowledge -- Immanuel Kant.
Knowledge is dual according to Immanuel Kant.
Analytic (a priori, before measurement) is dual to synthetic (a posteriori, after measurement) -- Immanuel Kant.
If knowledge is dual then information is dual hence there is syntropy!
Your mind is syntropic as you create or synthesize reality.
Duality creates reality!
2:33 That is not the scientific definition of nothing. That is the physics definition of physical space. Mathematics is the king of the sciences, and we obviously don't say that, "nothing is quantum fluctuations." Mostly because "quantum fluctuation" is defined no where in pure mathematics.
..how do thoughts appear to you? Are they voice, picture, both, or blank? Have a conscious look! Say in the mind "Hello, you". If picture, imagine the person waving hello. If blank, observe breath. Try it. You aware of those things? Now shift attention to that which is aware of those things. What is it? It must be you, the observer. Describe awareness. It is formless. Nothing. Yet, it is aware. Now you are aware of the true self. Now you are aware of nothingness. Now ask the question - 'what does this mind, this body, and the world of the senses, truly know or can unknow about that which is aware of this?". Ask it. One will observe that one is neither knowing, nor is one unknowing that which is referred to as the true self. Nothing....
From a materialist perspective, nothingness can not be explained. From a spiritual perspective, matter can be explained as a spiritual phenomenon. Like, 'all matter exist in the mind of a self conscious spirit'. I respect that for most people, this idea might be a bridge too far.
Give it up for quantum foam, kids, and don't stop for Cosmic Inflation. Keep your eye on the screen as the graphics are phenomenal. Certainly for those who are high.
There is no such thing as nothing, it's impossible. As soon as you think about the concept of nothing, then the, "nothing" becomes something, occupied by your observations and thoughts. The nothing wasn't created until you thought about it. It didn't exist.
if you are not aware of something it don't exists for you. the only thing that connect us with reality is our own conciousness, awareness , imagination, and feelings.
Nothing should be read as 'No.. Thing' It is a conscious field and the experience of nothingness comes only because the observer becomes the observed and there is nothing else to experience other than himself
Impermanence is called as nothing . It should not be taken literally. We refer it as MAYA meaning we all are caught up in the worldly matters for which we do not know the truth . After the self realisation the perception of every thing changes because the baggage what we carry in our mind gets destroyed and that collapse of burden creates entirely different feeling . It can’t be explained but can be experienced. UG Krishnamurti and Alan watts and Ramana much more
True "nothing" is beyond words or concepts. Our concept of nothing and something is duality. True nothing is beyond duality. It cannot be known.
Ex nihilo nihil fit (From nothing, nothing comes). When the "from" refers to the material cause, then truly nothing can result from nothing. However, when the "from" refers to the order of events-as in creation, first there was nothing and then something-then the axiom is not valid. The formulation of the axiom is from the Eleatic school of philosophy. (see greek philosophy.)
I've been saying for years that there's no such thing as nothing. Even nothing has a name, which is something.
Agreed . There is no such thing as nothing . The name has no substance .
Humanity is logically blinded by our false perspective of physical matter.
We ask the question of nothing relative to physical matter being everything.
Quantum intelligence is not limited by time or dimensions of space.
The concept of nothing could be If a person dies the brain stops and then there is nothing to experience, although life still goes on without that person's experience
...and just because you cannot answer the "egg" question, you should consider eggs were always there. So was everything else in the universe. But that should make you "think" not "deny" infinity.
Compared to the universe, we are so small, approximately to nothing.
Compared to our existence for only less than 130 years, we are nothing to billions years.
Only human egos are bigger than anything else.
Nothing doesn’t exist..empty space is something,but because we can’t see it…we can’t see ultraviolet with our eyes ,but it’s there.
Something exists in space, we can't say nothing. There exists a point of energy which exists today also.
A year ago or so, I asked bing chatbot how long would it be to detect if Hawking radiation can be demonstrated by observation. It estimated the number of years required to witness this would be ten, raised to the power of 50 to 60 years, which is magnitudes older than the existing universe. So, there is that. Perhaps that, although it is logically consistent, it is why such radiation remains theoretical.
1 is everything, 0 is nothing. Everything started from nothingness. Your understanding of nothing think nothing can not exists, but the nothing is where everything started.
There never has been nor ever will be a time of nothing. There always has been and always will be pure conscious energy. Conscious energy is the source of all things .
plz explain further..
and I agree with time. Time is definitely man made
@@j.c.2514
Can I ask
When the earth spins on its axis
We see the sun travel from the east to the west
Wouldn’t that mean “ time” is not manmade?
What do you think?
I’m trying to grasp this
🤷♀️🙌🏻
Thx
Your question was intriguing to me
Ive always been nothing. Whats goin on ?NOTHING
Positive and negative waves emanating in a vacuum suggests a surface which is vibrating and creating the vacuum.
You don't need to use graphene to demonstrate hole-electron carrrier formation due to a high electric field. This can be done using any semiconductor and in some cases, using insulators.
Inflation - Think about what special and general relativity says. It tells us that as time slows, space "shrinks" or "contracts". At a zero time rate, dimensions do not exist, eg a photon does not experience distance or space.
I deduce from this that the time rate field is the fundamental field and that space, or dimensions, emerge from this field. Time is real, it has energy, but space is merely an experience that depends on the energy of the field. If the field has no energy, (time has stopped), then there is no space. If the field has its maximum energy, (somewhere out there in intergalactic space far away from mass), then space is at its maximum "size".
Going back into the past, to the beginning, I suggest that there was no time and so there was no space either. Only the commencement of time was necessary to "produce" space. When there is time, space has meaning. So the ultimate beginning was the beginning of time, of the emergence of the energy field from nothing.
Empty space is not nothing even an absolute vacuum so it explains nothing. What is nothing we can’t even comprehend it. I don’t think we can ever understand how we’re here.
Nothing is something. We are just too stupid to know what it is yet.
Nothing has to be something because something cant be nothing
Nonsense with CasualCat part one ☝️
@@CasualCatOfficial If we try to think of it, we cant. Its just we cant process it by even thinking of it and we try to comprehand the imagination to make the logical explanation for it to literally not overheat your brain.
@@igorfire13 its crazy how we cant thing of nothing but thinking of nothing is thinking of something 😭
@@CasualCatOfficial thinking of nothing may through the time make your head explode like literally, because nothing in your head can make logic of it.
Reality, as I perceive it, can be described as nothing almost becoming something, like zero finding illusory, yet valid, substance by complicating the definition of itself as a composite of (+1) and (-1).
nothingness is like "before you were born".
The world was still alive, just without your knowledge.
Im hoping the search for nothingness leads us to zero point energy.
Wouldn't the concept of nothing also necessarily imply the absence of quantum fields?
guess the quantum fields are our most close to nothing possible...
@@rcoimbra00 I agree but that's why I use the word concept. If there are quantum fields then by definition that is not nothing. Then again based on that reasoning the existence of space itself is not nothing. I can only conclude that in a reality where there is evidently something it is simply a logical contradiction to believe there could ever be absolutely nothing.
@@bendybruce Parmenides of Elea, a pre-Socratic philosopher said something like "What is being it is, and what is not being it isn't", and of course I also agree that it is hard to conceptualize a nothing...
but a field is a dipole (-/+), 0=1+(-1), we cannot sense the nothing thats why science denies the ether, this is the holy trinity, not three but the eternal one divided into two
If "nothing" could exist, it would be without time. What does it mean to exist for a literally zero span of time? It means... it can't exist
@@deadsirius3531 Exactly. It seems that spacetime, and energy/matter as well possibly if they are all interconnected, must exist by default, as a brute requirement. Since whatever can be said to exist requires the passage of time, and time is intertwined with these other things. For me the mystery then becomes is why life and consciousness also came to be, on Earth anyway. One could just as easily imagine a universe completely devoid of life anywhere, and yet, here we are.
@@Ragnar-Lothbrok967I'm not so sure about that last part anymore. I think there is a very real way in which reality as we know it would not exist without our conscious experience of it. Not to say we're just creating reality in our heads, but just that "objects in 3 dimensional space changing through sequential moments of time" is just a shorthand for the real reality and a very limited one at that (then again, it is all we have so maybe a moot point). We are kind of like the application running the "code" of reality, but also part of that code... and now I sound crazy but I promise I don't mean this in some loose spiritualism way
@deadsirius3531 Sounds sort of like the ideas Donald Hoffman talks about, that we're not seeing reality as it actually is, but rather only what we need to survive. Which is not really a novel idea, but he in particular is obsessed with it.
@Ragnar-Lothbrok967 well it's an idea I'd been kind of increasingly hovering around for a long time but I have to admit Hoffman's book did help to solidify it and put it into words for me. Obviously none of us can know but this line of thinking really makes the most sense to me
We’re stuck with the concept of nothing due to our limit capacity of think and lack of words to explain it.
Break limit barrier
10% who holds the access to 90% barrier fold
Infinite paths of pathways
For consciousness : Nothing = Everything. Though, Consciousness comes out of Nothing. Pure black, not a shadow, because that's created by Light. Einstein was wrong: all matter gets its energy from the outside. Matter doesn't have energy of its own. This contradicts e=m.c² .
(Non-scientist/non-philosopher here).
I thought that the first law of thermodynamics
made impossible "nothingness".
The more pertinent question is would the same principle hold true for money? You could never truly have 0$ on your bank account, since there is no such thing as "net zero" These negative and positive tiny fractions of one penny would pop in and out of existence, annihilating each other, until at one point there's an imbalance, and your total begins to rapidly grow, until it accrues millions.