if "nothing" indeed exists?

does that not mean something exists? and also is not nothing a perception of quantity and therefore irrelevant in determining existence? absence does not necessarily mean nonexistence.


precisely deep thought

Update 2:

jigsaw, what you say is purely based on the interpretation of the meaning of how language is used. language is a big problem in determining such ideas because many cannot overcome the confusing semantics and see something in its essence, or therein lack of.

Update 3:

Marc B:...burning your hand is a sensation, which is purely a result of the electro-chemical action potentials that surge from your hand to your brain. which is a "perception" however someone who has no sensory neurons dont feel it so technically in that sense it does not exist..yet it does, though not universally...?

Update 4:

batz: take for instance this sentence: "there is nothing in between the space between the nucleus and the electron of an atom." does that not imply a certain quantity?

Update 5:

thats interesting patrick

Update 6:

batz: i see...

15 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Nothing is not a perception of quantity - zero is a perception of quantity. There is a big difference between zero and nothing. "Nothing" is not something that can exist because it is not something, if you will. It is the lack of existence of anything, if existence is defined as being dependent on that which exists, be it tangible or abstract. If existence is defined as a state of potential, then "nothing" can be the empty state, or the lack of the state of potential altogether. Furthermore, in reference to quantity, the quantity of zero can be present in the state even if it is occupied (and therefore not "nothing") - if the sum of the occupants is zero.

    As far as the atom goes, the nothing in that statement implies an empty state of potential, which has a quantitative value of zero. The two coincide, but are not the same. Empty space exists between the nucleus and the electron cloud. Also, if you subscribe to the theory of quantum flux, there is indeed something in the so called empty-space - a myriad of sub-atomic particles (quarks etc.) coming into and out of existence - particles having values such that the net value is zero, but because the particles are present at any given time, there is not "nothing" in this space.

    Source(s): what's really important is figuring out what we mean by existence before we try to decide how "nothing" relates to it...
  • 1 decade ago

    since this is not really a question i'm just going to throw out some thoughts that this lead me too

    -perhaps nothing is sort of "the gaps"...what we have yet to define, or even the undefinable?

    -i have thought about nothing as an idea for the beginning of time/before time/etc...sort of an action-reaction type scenario. there was once nothing so there had to be something.

    -nothing means something...eh maybe. but nothing is more of an conceptual thing i'd say. but a concept that we, since we are something, could never fully grasp

    -this is the major problem. your "nothing" seems to be the quantifiable nothing, but i believe the true nothing is more than just the absence of existence.

    -i believe i would agree that "it is irrelevant in determining existence", although i'm not exactly sure what you mean by this only because i feel it is actually a part of existence.

    -this may seem confusing but i think that "nothing" can be a part of existence without losing its essence of nothingness.

    -i just am now reading another answer and the person mentioning the semantics is correct about the difficulty with language

    I don't know just some quick thoughts...

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    Canada does no longer exist. I stay in an section that rhymes with Canada yet its a paranormal land that could want to in straightforward words be seen in case you're taking a magic pill. I listen that position called Canada has no political device. each and each of the human beings are held in obscurity and performance no voice. basically sheep like New Zealand.

  • 1 decade ago

    it is all perception but if you burn your hand and you feel it I believe that is real enough besides that is like 3 different questions and if you have the time in life to ponder over these questions and want to waste your time have fun because there is no true answer

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It is true, absence is not proof of nonexistence. If that were true, we would have to believe life on other planets did not exist until we saw it for ourselves.

  • 1] That depends on if you believe in yin and yang or dualism.

    2] Yes, good point.

    Source(s): nihilist
  • 1 decade ago

    *nods* By calling it "nothing" one makes into something and therefore more than "nothing". True "nothingness" only exists when we do not speak of it.

  • 1 decade ago

    Do not think to hard it will give you a headache.

    Something did exist before the big bang, we just do not what it was.


    She-Wolf - I thought unicorns where real, now I'm really sad. :=))))

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Wow, your really deep, I wish I had some hip boots to wade through your statement.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Prove to me that "nothing" exists.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.