[Mohan.C]

Nothingness should have no spatial expansion because it means there will be a potential to fill it, so making it not nothing but something.
If singularity is a point which means it has no spatial dimensions then it is nothing, then saying the universe was created from a singularity does not make sense to me because if it could create then the potential to create made it something.
If nothing existed before the creation of this universe then the universe couldn't have been created because whatever nothing was before the creation of the universe was something other than nothing.

[mkirkpatrick]

Excellent thread starter Mohan,are you see nothing as one word,or do you see it as no-thing,prehaps you could say!



regards michael.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Excellent thread starter Mohan,are you see nothing as one word,or do you see it as no-thing,prehaps you could say! regards michael.

I thought nothing had its roots in no-thing. I think i see nothing as no-thing. I don't see any difference actually.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Mohan.C I thought nothing had its roots in no-thing. I think i see nothing as no-thing. I don't see any difference actually.

So then we are back to the old chestnut,can something come from nothing?




regards michael.

[N0B0DY]

Of course not "see" in the literal sense, but if we could see absolutely nothing, it would be the same as if we could see absolutely everything simultaneously; then, anything that is observed must be the result of a relative process of creation/annihilation requiring no beginning or ending.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick So then we are back to the old chestnut,can something come from nothing? regards michael.

If you had asked me 1 hour ago I would have said yes, Now i'm not so sure. Because I believed nothing could have potential. Now I believe it can't.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by N0B0DY Of course not "see" in the literal sense, but if we could see absolutely nothing, it would be the same as if we could see absolutely everything simultaneously; then, anything that is observed must be the result of a relative process of creation/annihilation requiring no beginning or ending.

I did not mean 'see' literally.
Creation or annihilation would be an event. I wonder how it can occur without beginning or end?

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Mohan.C If you had asked me 1 hour ago I would have said yes, Now i'm not so sure. Because I believed nothing could have potential. Now I believe it can't.

Be sure again my friend,they are one of the same!



regards michael.

[N0B0DY]

Originally Posted by Mohan.C I did not mean 'see' literally. Creation or annihilation would be an event. I wonder how it can occur without beginning or end?

I conceded as much with respect to the expression, but suggested if it were possible it would be the same as seeing everything simultaneously.

The simultaneity of the event you referred to, would be the absolute point of creation and annihilation. Perhaps a useful analogy would be to consider the cyclic nature of a magnetic field, from South to North poles - a continuous event without beginning or end.

[austintorn@aol.com]

Potential, or possibility, is eternal. It is a counter-intuitive form of reality, such as quantum superposition, from which our penultimate reality of "something" springs. Think of it as neither something nor nothing, as this is what it must be, for nothing cannot exist and something cannot come from nothing.