The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Can we make something out of nothing?  (Read 4555 times)

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Can we make something out of nothing?
« on: 21/01/2016 22:04:54 »
By nothing I am referring to an infinite void, the only possible way I can personally think of to make something out of nothing is if I could ''squeeze'' all the nothing together.


Any other ways anybody can think of?


 

Offline flr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 302
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #1 on: 22/01/2016 02:49:09 »
Quote
  ... is if I could ''squeeze'' all the nothing together.
Looks like your 'nothing' is actually some kind of 'something' since you can 'squeeze' it.

I do not believe in ex-nihilis creation. The big bang was a remodeling of a pre-existing reality.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #2 on: 22/01/2016 03:10:40 »
First you have to define what you mean by nothing.
There is a definition of nothing that refers to the total absence of Matter and energy. That nothing can still be described by it's physical qualities. It can still be manipulated by matter that is not a part of it. GR says so.
Physical coordinates can still be ascribed to it.
Yes such a nothing can be manipulated so you can make something out of it.

Or do you mean a nothing that does not even have spacetime? A nothing that is the absence of absolutely everything?
Such a nothing can only be a weird philosophical concept and can not exist in the Universe.
It certainly can't in any way be addressed scientifically, and as such your question would not apply to this concept, because to make something out of anything implies manipulation.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #3 on: 22/01/2016 04:11:47 »
First you have to define what you mean by nothing.
There is a definition of nothing that refers to the total absence of Matter and energy. That nothing can still be described by it's physical qualities. It can still be manipulated by matter that is not a part of it. GR says so.
Physical coordinates can still be ascribed to it.
Yes such a nothing can be manipulated so you can make something out of it.

Or do you mean a nothing that does not even have spacetime? A nothing that is the absence of absolutely everything?
Such a nothing can only be a weird philosophical concept and can not exist in the Universe.
It certainly can't in any way be addressed scientifically, and as such your question would not apply to this concept, because to make something out of anything implies manipulation.

I must be terrible at explaining what I mean.  By nothing I mean the absence of matter, an infinite  void of nothing space. A complete negativity.    And by squeeze I mean to contract to a point.   So if you can imagine an infinite nothing that the whole contracts to a singular point, I imagine that the negative nothing becomes a denser nothing at this point,    A sort of nothing pressure that creates energy. 

« Last Edit: 22/01/2016 04:13:51 by Thebox »
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #4 on: 22/01/2016 05:16:50 »
I can not make any sense out of that.
Sorry..
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #5 on: 22/01/2016 07:19:20 »
I can not make any sense out of that.
Sorry..


I can't make much sense of my own thoughts at times, try imagining sucking in the whole of space into your lungs .

 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1917
  • Thanked: 123 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #6 on: 22/01/2016 09:43:57 »
I can't make much sense of my own thoughts at times, try imagining sucking in the whole of space into your lungs .
If you can suck it into your lungs it must be a something, not nothing.
Negativity would imply something.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #7 on: 22/01/2016 16:10:04 »

If you can suck it into your lungs it must be a something, not nothing.
Negativity would imply something.


Why must negativity imply something of concrete existence? 

Ok, I will change the question slightly, I will say the void has 0 things that are a concrete existence, but has a negative presence.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #8 on: 22/01/2016 20:39:49 »
You still don't get it. You are contradicting yourself within every description you offer of nothing.
A presence of any sort (positive, negative or otherwise) signifies something of existence.
You can't have it both ways.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #9 on: 22/01/2016 20:53:56 »
You still don't get it. You are contradicting yourself within every description you offer of nothing.
A presence of any sort (positive, negative or otherwise) signifies something of existence.
You can't have it both ways.

I am saying that space itself behind all the light and cbmr and mass is a negative nothing. Empty negativeness , there is nothing positive about it, zero anything, but negative compared to a ''polarity test''.


A negative ether made of nothing if you like. You can,t detect it because it give no reading and is made of nothing



« Last Edit: 22/01/2016 20:57:05 by Thebox »
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #10 on: 22/01/2016 22:51:16 »
I am saying that space itself behind all the light and cbmr and mass is a negative nothing. Empty negativeness , there is nothing positive about it, zero anything, but negative compared to a ''polarity test''.
And yet you can talk about it and describe it. Your description is wrong but even with that aside, you are describing it so your claim that it is nothing is obviously false.
Anyway we are going in circles.
Leaving thread.
 

Offline alysdexia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 121
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #11 on: 23/01/2016 03:33:29 »
By nothing I am referring to an infinite void, the only possible way I can personally think of to make something out of nothing is if I could ''squeeze'' all the nothing together.


Any other ways anybody can think of?

How do you know some"thing" is a void?  You can't interact with it, so it must forever remain a void.

Take equal and opposite motes of matter and antimatter.  If they come together, this real mass converts to virtval mass and their potential vis converts to motional vis, each of which can be transferred to any other mote.  What if you did the same to equal and opposite motes of positive and negative matter?  There is still a whole univers of motes to contend with, and the nullification should be overwhelmed by the Lamb and Schrödinger backgrounds.

That nothing can still be described by it's physical qualities.

You did it again, again.

Quote
It can still be manipulated by matter that is not a part of it. GR says so.
Physical coordinates can still be ascribed to it.
Yes such a nothing can be manipulated so you can make something out of it.

Or do you mean a nothing that does not even have spacetime?

GR does not say so.  It says certain properties are proportionate, like Einstein said E and m are proportionate; it does not mean they're equivalent.  Certain products are equivalent, but the products and properties are not identical.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #12 on: 23/01/2016 03:48:03 »
Yes I keep doing it. It seems to be an automatic finger habit.
Thanks for pointing it out.
I have to concentrate better and break it.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #13 on: 23/01/2016 08:47:19 »

And yet you can talk about it and describe it. Your description is wrong but even with that aside, you are describing it so your claim that it is nothing is obviously false.
Anyway we are going in circles.
Leaving thread.

I do understand that it must be hard to grasp that nothing is something but still nothing.  Thank you for your posts.

You never considered that nothing could be ∞  there is ''nothing'' that dictates the size of nothing accept the mind. A void could be infinite or the size of an atom. Nothing is a part of all matter, dissemble any matter any you will see it contains nothing. 
« Last Edit: 23/01/2016 09:00:19 by Thebox »
 

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Thanked: 43 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #14 on: 23/01/2016 13:21:13 »
Something from nothing is possible, if the experimental equipment, used for verification, lacks the sensitivity to verify. If you cannot measure it, it is not there, except in the imagination. If we can't measure it, but assume it is there, it becomes a unicorn. For example, before the invention of the microscope, life was assumed to materialize through spontaneous generation from nothing. What appeared to be clean pure water, to the naked eye, could team with life, overnight. There was no way to prove that  something came first, without a microscope. It began as nothing, was the only science conclusion based on hard experimental data. Beyond that was only speculation and imagination. This was not considered solid science.
 
In chemistry, various materials and substances have phase boundaries. They phases exist, as something, only within limits. Liquid water appears between 0C and 100C. Outside those limits liquid water is nothing. If we could not achieve those limits in the lab we would never see liquid water. Therefore it is nothing but imaginary.

In the case of phase called mass, mass cannot move at the speed of light according to special relativity. Therefore no mass can be found at the speed of light. Mass would be nothing, but imaginary, at the speed of light, since the mass phase does not exist there. If you were sitting on a speed of light reference, and some mass from inertial reference, converted to energy, you would see the energy, however, it would appear to come from nothing. You would never know mass was possible if all you ever knew was C. The affect would appear from nothing you ever saw in C.

If you were on a rocket ship, that become neutrinos, so it could reach the speed of light, the inertial universe would appear to contract to a point. Because of the point universe, you would not be able to see all the diversity of wavelengths of energy, since all this diversity is also contracted to a point. The diversity of energy wavelengths, would appear as nothing at C. You would never know it existed.

There may be affects going on in C, due this inertial energy diversity, that may suggest this diversity, but since we can't see the source diversity, the affect appears to come from nothing. We cannot measure a phase that does not exist at the experimental conditions. We cannot measure liquid water if all we know is 10,000K. We cannot measure inertial affects if all we know is C.

If we reverse this, all these unique phases we can see in C, may not exist in inertial reference. If the phase boundary is breeched they disappear. If we built a portal from C, into inertial reference, mass and energy diversity may suddenly appear in inertial, but it will appear to come from nothing. The mass/energy of the BB would appear as coming from nothing that is known in the inertial universe. These nothing phases are only possible at C. We can speculate, but since we and our tools are inertial phase based, how do you measure C phases, that can't exist in inertial reference, where the tools exists? These tools cannot exist in the speed of light reference.
« Last Edit: 23/01/2016 13:33:10 by puppypower »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #15 on: 23/01/2016 13:39:06 »
Something from nothing is possible, if the experimental equipment, used for verification, lacks the sensitivity to verify. If you cannot measure it, it is not there, except in the imagination. If we can't measure it, but assume it is there, it becomes a unicorn. For example, before the invention of the microscope, life was assumed to materialize through spontaneous generation from nothing. What appeared to be clean pure water, to the naked eye, could team with life, overnight. There was no way to prove that  something came first, without a microscope. It began as nothing, was the only science conclusion based on hard experimental data. Beyond that was only speculation and imagination. This was not considered solid science.
 
In chemistry, various materials and substances have phase boundaries. They phases exist, as something, only within limits. Liquid water appears between 0C and 100C. Outside those limits liquid water is nothing. If we could not achieve those limits in the lab we would never see liquid water. Therefore it is nothing but imaginary.

In the case of phase called mass, mass cannot move at the speed of light according to special relativity. Therefore no mass can be found at the speed of light. Mass would be nothing, but imaginary, at the speed of light, since the mass phase does not exist there. If you were sitting on a speed of light reference, and some mass from inertial reference, converted to energy, you would see the energy, however, it would appear to come from nothing. You would never know mass was possible if all you ever knew was C. The affect would appear from nothing you ever saw in C.

If you were on a rocket ship, that become neutrinos, so it could reach the speed of light, the inertial universe would appear to contract to a point. Because of the point universe, you would not be able to see all the diversity of wavelengths of energy, since all this diversity is also contracted to a point. The diversity of energy wavelengths, would appear as nothing at C. You would never know it existed.

There may be affects going on in C, due this inertial energy diversity, that may suggest this diversity, but since we can't see the source diversity, the affect appears to come from nothing. We cannot measure a phase that does not exist at the experimental conditions. We cannot measure liquid water if all we know is 10,000K. We cannot measure inertial affects if all we know is C.

If we reverse this, all these unique phases we can see in C, may not exist in inertial reference. If the phase boundary is breeched they disappear. If we built a portal from C, into inertial reference, mass and energy diversity may suddenly appear in inertial, but it will appear to come from nothing. The mass/energy of the BB would appear as coming from nothing that is known in the inertial universe. These nothing phases are only possible at C. We can speculate, but since we and our tools are based, how do you measure C phases, that can't exist in the inertial reference of the tools?

Defining Nothing


Let us define nothing, a concept in the mind that nothing means there is nothing there , a situation where if we had a sphere with a volume of X and then we subtracted the same equal volume of  X , we would be defining nothing.
And if we take the volume of nothing and add the volume of a sphere we then again have something but the something is still made of nothing.

0∞³-0∞³=0

1³-1³=0

0∞³=1³

0∞³=xyz

1³=xyz



« Last Edit: 23/01/2016 13:51:04 by Thebox »
 

Offline alysdexia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 121
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #16 on: 23/01/2016 14:59:33 »
team -> teem; affect -> effect; breeched -> breached.  The Chèrèncov effect says mass can move at celerity, when celerity varies, and it doesn't collapse into a point; the body emits broadband radiation.

0∞³-0∞³=0

1³-1³=0

0∞³=1³

0∞³=xyz

1³=xyz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse_of_notation.

The correct relation for indeterminates, infinities, and infinitesimals is a nonbijection like ⊃, ∋, ⊂, ∈.
 
The following users thanked this post: chiralSPO

Offline syhprum

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3816
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #17 on: 23/01/2016 16:39:02 »
Neutrinos cannot move at the speed of light they have mass. this is now well established
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #18 on: 23/01/2016 18:56:28 »
team -> teem; affect -> effect; breeched -> breached.  The Chèrèncov effect says mass can move at celerity, when celerity varies, and it doesn't collapse into a point; the body emits broadband radiation.

0∞³-0∞³=0

1³-1³=0

0∞³=1³

0∞³=xyz

1³=xyz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse_of_notation.

The correct relation for indeterminates, infinities, and infinitesimals is a nonbijection like ⊃, ∋, ⊂, ∈.

Thank you for that, but then how would your link be relevant to new maths? 

That is suggesting that maths is set in stone and know new maths can be formed?
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1917
  • Thanked: 123 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #19 on: 24/01/2016 00:57:31 »
The correct relation for indeterminates, infinities, and infinitesimals is a nonbijection like ⊃, ∋, ⊂, ∈.
He does this all the time. He goes through lists of maths symbols, picks one, misuses it and claims it is New Maths.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #20 on: 24/01/2016 05:52:40 »

He does this all the time. He goes through lists of maths symbols, picks one, misuses it and claims it is New Maths.

Correct me if I am wrong, if you had not learnt any science maths you would not know what the maths meant?

So how can you conceive that my maths is wrong if you have not learnt it or understand it ?

I am not sure it really give a result but it explains something relative.

I am not sure myself it is a correct and accurate, but to me personally it looks like it explains something that I visual imagined. I imagine that 0 is nothing and infinite at the same time.

I could choose any part of a void of any specific ''zero point space'' reference frame and conclude it was nothing, but at the same time I could observe the ''whole'' of the infinite void and conclude that was also nothing.

Zero point space I mentioned before is the ''nothing point''  where space joins/meets space.  Nothing points are the entirety of infinite nothing space.

It looks like this

∞0→→→0ps←←←∞0

But isotropic from any  0 point space in any reference frame.

Now if you haven't worked out yet that a black hole is simply a visual Universe, I will explain.

Imagine my explanation of space , now imagine throughout this infinite nothing space which is in absolute dark, there is bubbles of light ''floating'' around, however they are not really bubbles and you do not see them as a light bubble you don't observe at all they blend in, why do they blend in?  because of the inverse square law and relative to the external observer the light is not reaching them in magnitude to see anything of the light bubble.

So the nearer to a black hole you get, the lighter it gets and the more you see inside the ''black hole'',

In another terms if there is multi-verses, and beyond the black background of space there was a sister earth, they could not see us and we can not see them but we both could see the same stars on the edge of our vision,

as the distance stars expand and an eventually of the diminishing light reflected and vanishing points perspective, the stars ''vanish'', the ''others'' on the other side of the blackness, will see new stars appearing.


« Last Edit: 24/01/2016 06:23:33 by Thebox »
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1917
  • Thanked: 123 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #21 on: 24/01/2016 08:32:12 »
I'm not saying your maths is wrong. I'm saying it is impossible to judge because you are misusing standard maths terms and not defining your terms or showing how your use is different.
Real mathematicians when inventing a new maths idea will invent a new symbol, but they always explain its use and give examples.
They also explain as simply as possible without using convoluted wording.

 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3154
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #22 on: 24/01/2016 14:29:38 »
I'm not saying your maths is wrong. I'm saying it is impossible to judge because you are misusing standard maths terms and not defining your terms or showing how your use is different.
Real mathematicians when inventing a new maths idea will invent a new symbol, but they always explain its use and give examples.
They also explain as simply as possible without using convoluted wording.


I did not think it would be that difficult to understand only 0 and 1 and the infinite symbol.


0∞³ defines an infinite void of nothing

0∞³-0∞³=0 defines a 0 point space


1³-1³=0

1*1*1-1*1*1=0

because to have something, 1 of anything, it has to be 1xyz

and so on , do you get it now?

still work in progress of course. Not a completion.
X³=XYZ

0∞³/c=r1









« Last Edit: 24/01/2016 14:45:03 by Thebox »
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #23 on: 24/01/2016 15:13:26 »
I'm not saying your maths is wrong. I'm saying it is impossible to judge because you are misusing standard maths terms and not defining your terms or showing how your use is different.
Real mathematicians when inventing a new maths idea will invent a new symbol, but they always explain its use and give examples.
They also explain as simply as possible without using convoluted wording.
Excellent point Colin, math is only properly used when applicably used. One can't apply equal values to the number one when speaking about one apple and one orange.
 

Offline alysdexia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 121
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #24 on: 24/01/2016 17:25:34 »
0∞ includes anything, not only 1; when you subtract that from itself you still get anything.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Can we make something out of nothing?
« Reply #24 on: 24/01/2016 17:25:34 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums