Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zeroca You are right, for instance I imagine nothing before big bang as an empty homogenous space without even any material point in it, and after bid bang as the greatest sphere (with infinitely large radius), within which the universe exists, but imagination is one thing and reality – another.
In principle the conversation was not about what nothing is and does it exist physically or not. Of course nothing is the same as nonexistence, so nothing doesn’t exist in 3-D space within time, i.e. it doesn’t exist physically, i.e. it doesn’t exist at all, but the main point of discussion is that I’m claiming that nothing (which doesn’t exist physically) gave birth of the world (which exists physically) by separation into two opposite phenomenon, which happens within nothing. But Omny (like greatest part of people) says that only something can experience separation, but not nothing (even separation into two opposite equal phenomenon), because as nothing doesn’t exist, so it can’t experience any sort of change, even it can’t be referred to as “it”.
I myself find most difficult to convey my ideas and to explain them to other people, as probably everybody does, so I try to do it with some indirect methods. |
1. First, nothing doesn't need to be imagination: it is a real thing, without being a thing. I also find it dificult to explain my ideas. nothing doesn't exist, but it is real because it is what we use to describe 0 (getting hard to xpalin).
if you have five apples and you change them for 3 oranges, but you give an orange each to three of you r friends. you are left with nothing.
Ok, im leaving the nothing topic because this thread isn't about it.
2. I think the wrong thing about thinking that nothing can be spiled to create something is that you have to describe how come something comes from nothing. I thing, something can be splited, and beocme something. I also think something can be splited and become nothing (Ok, matter can't be created or destroyed,. but I think this law is wrong). but I think that if you split nothing, you can only get nothing. and anyway, nothing can only be splited theoretically or philosofically, not physically, in the real world.
Also, when the universe was still the size of a golf ball, it wasnt' IN nothing. the universe was then, and still is now, everything. it isn't in nothing. because there is nothing out of the universe (well maybe other universes are also around there, but we still don't know) and out of the universe, nobody knows what there is, but I can guarantee, that it isn't "nothing".
there is a difference between being real and being fisical.
And, if you don't agree, try to think fisically in nothingness. can you? what do you see? vaccum space maybe? well then, you ARE watching something: you are watching space. And string theorists descovered in 1996 that d-branes were the actual fabirc of space and time. so when you whathc space you are whatching fundamental particles.
if there IS a fisical existance of nothingness, it escapes from our imagination and our mental, fisical and psicological capacities.
Guillermo Garrido