A question concerning density, mathematical proof.

[Dragongod]

Current science describes a solid, liquid, and gas, as having different densities. Solids have the highest density, then comes liquids, and finally gases. They say in between the particles lies "empty space." Can someone please describe to me the properties of "empty space" because as fas as I can logically reason, its impossible for "nothingness" (the absense of matter and energy)" to exist.

Also, mathematics currently states that one can divide infinitely into any value. Doesn't this show that matter is already infinitely dense, meaning that "empty space" (the absense of matter and energy) doesn't actually exist. Doesn't this basically state that matter is filled infinitely with more matter? If this is true then Stephen Hawking's definition of a black hole having a singularity would not hold up because all matter would already be a singularity(infinite matter, no room for empty space) in of itself.

[Robert]

Hi Dragongod,

Our next chat session will be on just this topic -- "What is Space". It will be held this coming Saturday, April 16th, at 4pm CST. Your welcome to drop in and either observe, or add your own thoughts to the subject. You can find more details here. Hope to see you there.

Regards,
--Robert

[treed]

What about plasma?

[Dragongod]

sorry, lol, plasma too.

[treed]

Ok then!!!

[Dragongod]

lol. does anyone have any comments to my post.

[Guille]

I think that you should look at mathematics as a theoretical or "paper" science. Then you would understand many things.

For example, when we are tough euclidean geometry, this is completely useless in the real world, becuase the streight line doesn't exist, and in fact, every thing has imperfections.

So if a number (except 0)can be infinitely devided by any number, this has nothing to do with the infinity of small. Maybe yes, matter, space....can be devided infinitely, but it wouldn't be bcuase a number can: human invented math, nature created matter, space....

[Dragongod]

to say that we created math and nature created space is to say that man created physics. If you are saying that math can't be used to prove reality then what you are saying is that essentially physics can't be proved to represent reality. The fact is math is tool, a language, just like any other language, such as physics, that is based on empirical and observational knowledge. We can't make up something "out of nothing" and therefore what we come up as concepts have to be to an extent grounded in reality. Humans as a whole do not factor in everything when they are observing something however and this is why we make mistakes. But if we were to take in everything into account before we made any conclusions we would automatically arrive at definate truth. Math and physics and english and language period can therefore represent reality accurately but only if we factor in everything i.e. know everything.

[wisp]

Dragongod

You have some good points, but your jumping too many steps at once. First step to consider is, empty space cannot be empty because it transmits force and has energy. So if space is not empty we could say it is full, say with some sort of ether stuff.
Now if matter moves through it, it will slow down and stop, unless this ether has a property whereby matter can pass effortlessly through it. Or maybe matter is caused as a result of a hole being present, and that hole changes its surrounding ether to make matter. So space is full and matter is created though holes or nothingness.

[Guille]

to say that we created math and nature created space is to say that man created physics. If you are saying that math can't be used to prove reality then what you are saying is that essentially physics can't be proved to represent reality. The fact is math is tool, a language, just like any other language, such as physics, that is based on empirical and observational knowledge. We can't make up something "out of nothing" and therefore what we come up as concepts have to be to an extent grounded in reality. Humans as a whole do not factor in everything when they are observing something however and this is why we make mistakes. But if we were to take in everything into account before we made any conclusions we would automatically arrive at definate truth. Math and physics and english and language period can therefore represent reality accurately but only if we factor in everything i.e. know everything.

Dragongod,

Mathematics is a theoretical and paper science. If not, try to use euclidean geometry in reality, measure whatever, it won't be perfect.

Physics is the mixture of philosophy and mathematics applied to understand certain phenomena in the unvierse. It is not completely math. And the mathematical part of physics the mathematical prove of the empirical evidences done by physics, which IS a practical+theoretical science.