[Mjgreybull (OP)]

So, shower thought that hit me. Not looking for answers but merely a discussion. If you have knowledge on the topic by all means share.

**Accidentally posted on General as I am new to this forum. Sorry if you see there already.

We have not proven the existence of a quantifiable true negative value for space in our universe. Most occurrences of negativity can be summarized as positive but in the opposite direction of a vector, frequency(ie spin), or charge. This is what negative is after all just a number line flowing in the opposite direction as the positive one. Wouldn't it stand to reason that if the universe has a sort of fundamental consistency to it, there should be negative space? That if you go small enough you pass the threshold "0" and then begin to move positive in the opposite direction. The idea I had is that what if that is all a dimension is, a positive and negative space of a prior dimension. A cube is just 2 planes connected across some sort of "bridge" between them. What if that "bridge" is the "0" value of that space. If so could that be where anti matter is? Is a collision between particles that produces anti matter just a relapse effect across the "bridge"?

A part of this idea that came to mind for me also, was the existence of super positions. If Negative Space is real, that would mean that the extents could be equal to Positive Space. Meaning that position should also be equal but across the "bridge". This would mean that two objects could exist in the same "position" relative to their native space.

This is just a shower though conjecture.

I'm a computer science major, so forgive me if I am lacking in knowledge. In most 3D/CAD programs this is how negative scale operates by flipping vertex data to negative values reversing triangles. Since we see more similarities between our world and the digital one as tech advances, I thought the question worth asking.


Edit: Another thought to expand upon this idea of Negative Space. Since mass "sags" spacetime, could it be pressing on the boundary between Positive and Negative Space if Negative Space is real. If that's the case could gravity be a byproduct due to the space expanding. We theorize space expands, if that's the case could Negative Space be doing the same in mirror? If so, would it be pulling things across the boundary due to "pressing" on the boundary? I am trying to be very careful to not speak of this like fact cause in.my head it makes sense. It is merely a conjecture though and I want to make that clear.

[Colin2B]

Most occurrences of negativity can be summarized as positive but in the opposite direction of a vector, frequency(ie spin), or charge. This is what negative is after all just a number line flowing in the opposite direction as the positive one. Wouldn't it stand to reason that if the universe has a sort of fundamental consistency to it, there should be negative space? That if you go small enough you pass the threshold "0" and then begin to move positive in the opposite direction.

That is true and there is indeed negative space.
As you know from CAD coordinates, and indeed all coordinate systems, all coordinates and vectors are relative to an arbitrary 0 reference point and so it is with spatial coordinates.
So, set your reference and all along the number line in one direction is positive and all in the opposite direction are negative.

[Origin]

We have not proven the existence of a quantifiable true negative value for space in our universe.

That is true, but what in the world would negative space be anyway?

Most occurrences of negativity can be summarized as positive but in the opposite direction of a vector, frequency(ie spin), or charge.

Neither frequency nor charge are vectors.

Wouldn't it stand to reason that if the universe has a sort of fundamental consistency to it, there should be negative space?

What do you mean by "fundamental consistency".  I don't see any reason (or even a possibility) for negative space.

That if you go small enough you pass the threshold "0" and then begin to move positive in the opposite direction. The idea I had is that what if that is all a dimension is, a positive and negative space of a prior dimension. A cube is just 2 planes connected across some sort of "bridge" between them. What if that "bridge" is the "0" value of that space. If so could that be where anti matter is? Is a collision between particles that produces anti matter just a relapse effect across the "bridge"?

That doesn't make much sense as stated.

A part of this idea that came to mind for me also, was the existence of super positions. If Negative Space is real, that would mean that the extents could be equal to Positive Space. Meaning that position should also be equal but across the "bridge". This would mean that two objects could exist in the same "position" relative to their native space.

This is just a shower though conjecture.

So this is just a WAG, was a bong involved at all in this conjecture?

I'm a computer science major, so forgive me if I am lacking in knowledge. In most 3D/CAD programs this is how negative scale operates by flipping vertex data to negative values reversing triangles. Since we see more similarities between our world and the digital one as tech advances, I thought the question worth asking.

What is with computer science guys going to science forums and making WAGs, it seems to be a thing...

Edit: Another thought to expand upon this idea of Negative Space. Since mass "sags" spacetime, could it be pressing on the boundary between Positive and Negative Space if Negative Space is real. If that's the case could gravity be a byproduct due to the space expanding. We theorize space expands, if that's the case could Negative Space be doing the same in mirror? If so, would it be pulling things across the boundary due to "pressing" on the boundary?

No.

I am trying to be very careful to not speak of this like fact cause in.my head it makes sense. It is merely a conjecture though and I want to make that clear.

No need to worry it is abundantly clear.

It probably makes sense in your head because you do not know much physics.  The believability of your idea is inversely proportional to the amount of physics you know.

[evan_au]

If so could (negative space) be where anti matter is?

Antimatter definitely exists in our (+)3D space, as seen in some nuclear decays (which spit out a positron), and high energy particle accelerators like the LHC (which emit sprays of many kinds of antimatter). But this antimatter is short-lived and makes up a small amount of our universe.
- There is a long-standing mystery in physics about why our universe should be almost entirely made of matter, since virtually all nuclear reactions seem to produce equal amounts of matter and antimatter.
- Maybe you are asking "Could the bulk of the antimatter be in negative space"?
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryon_asymmetry

Is a collision between particles that produces anti matter just a relapse effect across the "bridge"?

I don't think so.

The reasons is that there are some particles which are their own anti-particle, like the photon (and maybe the neutrino - but they interact so rarely that no-one can tell, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majorana_fermion ).
- So if there is (+)3D universe where the normal matter lives, while antimatter lives in an imperceptible (-)3D universe, where do the particles live that are neither matter nor antimatter?
- We certainly perceive photons in our universe
- When an electron and positron collide, they emit a pair of gamma rays, both of which are visible in our universe
      - they don't disappear into a (±)0D universe
      - Because a photon can only propagate as an electromagnetic wave in a 3D space (and 4D spacetime)
      - One photon doesn't stay in our universe, and the other one disappears into a (-)3D universe

So I think there are some holes in the theory (maybe as big as the holes in your shower floor...).

opposite direction of a ... frequency

Neither frequency nor charge are vectors.

True, but there is a sense in which frequency can be negative, and that comes out of the Fourier transform of a signal.
If an electrical signal takes on real, measurable values, then its Fourier transform has (equal and opposite) frequency components.

But mostly we just regard them as a mathematical artifact and ignore them.

[Colin2B]

there is a sense in which frequency can be negative, and that comes out of the Fourier transform of a signal.
If an electrical signal takes on real, measurable values, then its Fourier transform has (equal and opposite) frequency components.

But mostly we just regard them as a mathematical artifact and ignore them.

Beat me to it there Evan

[Mjgreybull (OP)]

We have not proven the existence of a quantifiable true negative value for space in our universe.

That is true, but what in the world would negative space be anyway?

Most occurrences of negativity can be summarized as positive but in the opposite direction of a vector, frequency(ie spin), or charge.

Neither frequency nor charge are vectors.

Wouldn't it stand to reason that if the universe has a sort of fundamental consistency to it, there should be negative space?

What do you mean by "fundamental consistency".  I don't see any reason (or even a possibility) for negative space.

That if you go small enough you pass the threshold "0" and then begin to move positive in the opposite direction. The idea I had is that what if that is all a dimension is, a positive and negative space of a prior dimension. A cube is just 2 planes connected across some sort of "bridge" between them. What if that "bridge" is the "0" value of that space. If so could that be where anti matter is? Is a collision between particles that produces anti matter just a relapse effect across the "bridge"?

That doesn't make much sense as stated.

A part of this idea that came to mind for me also, was the existence of super positions. If Negative Space is real, that would mean that the extents could be equal to Positive Space. Meaning that position should also be equal but across the "bridge". This would mean that two objects could exist in the same "position" relative to their native space.

This is just a shower though conjecture.

So this is just a WAG, was a bong involved at all in this conjecture?

I'm a computer science major, so forgive me if I am lacking in knowledge. In most 3D/CAD programs this is how negative scale operates by flipping vertex data to negative values reversing triangles. Since we see more similarities between our world and the digital one as tech advances, I thought the question worth asking.

What is with computer science guys going to science forums and making WAGs, it seems to be a thing...

Edit: Another thought to expand upon this idea of Negative Space. Since mass "sags" spacetime, could it be pressing on the boundary between Positive and Negative Space if Negative Space is real. If that's the case could gravity be a byproduct due to the space expanding. We theorize space expands, if that's the case could Negative Space be doing the same in mirror? If so, would it be pulling things across the boundary due to "pressing" on the boundary?

No.

I am trying to be very careful to not speak of this like fact cause in.my head it makes sense. It is merely a conjecture though and I want to make that clear.

No need to worry it is abundantly clear.

It probably makes sense in your head because you do not know much physics.  The believability of your idea is inversely proportional to the amount of physics you know.

Really appreciate your feed back. Would have preferred to receive more of a guiding effect on it but I see your point.

As for my thoughts on what spawned the thought of negative space it was thinking about what black holes are. I just began to wonder if you take a point in space at any frame in time, and decreased the length of that point infinitely across all 3 vectors where would you go if it was possible. I know that we don't know if there is an absolute "small", and theorize our smallest particles and sub particles as points particles. My thoughts were, if there is an absolute small, a "0", then could you go beyond it. Would the space expand into a super positional space overlapping our own, as a negative is just positive in the opposite direction. I am using any given point as the origin for this idea with change happening across all 3 axis together.

Now if that's just absolutely impossible, not that we know if anything is 100% impossible, then ok I can live with that. I just thought the idea was worth throwing around, or asking about.

Also I would like to point out I never called charges nor frequencies vectors. I said that Vectors, Frequencies, and Charges have negative counterparts to their positive ones.

I do not know what a WAG is, I am new to the forum this being my first post. I had a question and wanted an answer or correction, not insults and literally no helpfulness. You provided nothing to validate your own intelligence not that you should need to, but merely insulted flagrantly.  Was hoping to find other people looking to enjoy discussions or be enough of an intellectual to provide guidance, yet I found you.

[Halc]

As for my thoughts on what spawned the thought of negative space it was thinking about what black holes are.

Black holes are not really something that occupies space (at least coordinate space) at all. They're more of a future time than a place.

I know that we don't know if there is an absolute "small", and theorize our smallest particles and sub particles as points particles.

Absolute small is zero, yes. Fundamental particles cannot have a physical size for instance, since if they did, there'd be a left and right half, and those halves would be more fundamental components.

My thoughts were, if there is an absolute small, a "0", then could you go beyond it.

You can go negative, sure, but that isn't in the direction of small. I can make a table surface that is -10x-5 meters, but I can't stuff it into a moving van.since it isn't small enough.

I said that Vectors, Frequencies, and Charges have negative counterparts to their positive ones.

Some might have denied the negative frequency, but evan gave a nice example of why that might be meaningful.

I do not know what a WAG is

Usually 'SWAG' is used, which means "scientific wild ass guess". It's an industry term, not just a internet/forum one. One might tell the boss that "I'll take a swag at it", which is a guesstimation of sorts.

I am new to the forum this being my first post.

Most people posting such things are not looking for correction, but are here merely to defend them with inflexibility. We get a lot of that, so forgive what might seem to be a trigger-happy reply.

[Zer0]

& on behalf of All of Us...
Welcome to the TNS Forum!
🥳

P.S. - if i were u, I'd shower Alot more, but i get my imagination running from some other dark place.
U 🚿
Mee 🚽

[TheVat]

Seems like one of those potholes one can fall into when one subscribes to the metaphysical notion that math is "real" or "the universe is made of math."  Number lines are elements of an abstract symbol system, and as such they aren't obligated to correspond to some physical reality (i.e. what is "out there" beyond my cranium).  Math describes some aspects of reality, especially consistent patterns we perceive, remarkably well (what Eugene Wigner called "the unreasonable efficiency of math") but can also create unicorns of thought.  Space, by its very meaning, is going to have positive extension, otherwise it wouldn't really be space.  In string theories, some dimensions can be curled up into tiny knots, but they are still would not have negative dimensional values.  And really, there is no meaningful distance or entity that can exist below the Planck length.  Anyway, watch out for what philosophers of science call "reification." 

[Petrochemicals]

Why is space positive ?

[Colin2B]

Why is space positive ?

who said it is. Reread what @TheVat says

[Petrochemicals]

Why is space positive ?

who said it is. Reread what @TheVat says

What is the opposite of space

[Colin2B]

What is the opposite of space

Non-space?

[Petrochemicals]

What is the opposite of space

Non-space?

13 elephants in a mini ?

Non space is different to negative space I suppose. Non space should be whatever space is expanding from. Negative space would be the opposite, the black hole leading to the unproven white hole, the parallel universe.

[Colin2B]

Non space should be whatever space is expanding from.

Or into?