What is absolute nothingness?

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light? If you have a personal favorite theory, that is in someway related to the Electric Universe, this is where it can be posted.
danda
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by danda » Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:36 am

BeAChooser wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 12:53 am I do to, but that can't include God if he exists and created the universe.

So you are denying the possibility that a God exists.

Why didn't you just say so in the first place rather than saying "Let us say that 'God' created us."
Nowhere have I denied that a God could exist. Nor do I have any positive evidence. So I remain agnostic/undecided.

If the universe is everything that exists, and god exists, then god is part of the universe, by definition.

I think the point you may be missing is that I am acknowledging that our perceived reality, our entire cosmos that we can observe, is what most people call "the universe". But I would only call it "our reality" or "observable universe" or "microcosm". Others might use the term "universe" for "our reality" and "metaverse" or "macrocosm" for "all that exists".

Ok then, using my terminology, I acknowledge that an intelligent Creator could have created "our reality". Such creator still exists in "the universe" -- that being a macrocosm that extends far beyond our microcosm.

Also, "our reality" would need to have been constructed (created) using materials/tech available to the creator in their extended universe. not magic. (else we are entirely outside the realm of logic and science.)

Take for example a game of "Sim City" running in a computer. For sims (artificial characters) in the simulation, "God" could be the kid playing the game, or could be the programmer that made the game. But more importantly, the game exists in the computer's ram and CPU, which itself exists in our world, which is part of our universe. Thus, the simulated city and the individual "sim" is also a part of our universe, although the sim cannot observe anything outside the simulation.

Can we agree on that clarification/possibility?

Arcmode
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2022 10:45 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by Arcmode » Mon Mar 06, 2023 10:31 pm

The whole point of God is that he is uncreated and can create anything he wants out of nothing. That's what makes Him God. That's why he can't use pre-existing material - that's a god, not the God. God does what ever magic he chooses, he invented logic and science, he's not subject to rules you decided govern it. If you can conprehend it and make it a part of a larger whole, it's not God. He is beyond being and reality as we can ever understand it and exists (beyong existence,) in His essence, completely apart and outside of what He creates. The ultimate variable to upset every model and equation.

BeAChooser
Posts: 1049
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:24 am

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by BeAChooser » Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:28 am

danda wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:36 am Nowhere have I denied that a God could exist. Nor do I have any positive evidence. So I remain agnostic/undecided.
Fine. We've cleared that up at least. :D
danda wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:36 am If the universe is everything that exists, and god exists, then god is part of the universe, by definition.
But you said "Let us say that "God" created us and everything we can observe." In that case, God created the universe as most people understand it. And logic says that God couldn't create something he was a part of, could he?
danda wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:36 amI acknowledge that an intelligent Creator could have created "our reality". Such creator still exists in "the universe" -- that being a macrocosm that extends far beyond our microcosm.
Initially you said that “Existence, reality, the Universe could be said to be a disruption of this innate natural order.” That statement implies our universe and reality are the same thing. But now you’re using the word "reality" in a way that is not consistent with what most people define as the universe. Now you're talking about multiverses which leads to the question ... "Did God create them?" You see where this is going? If you allow that God could create universes, then sooner or later he has be outside them to start the chain.
danda wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:36 amAlso, "our reality" would need to have been constructed (created) using materials/tech available to the creator in their extended universe. not magic. (else we are entirely outside the realm of logic and science.)
Of course the concept of God is outside the realm of OUR logic and OUR science. But that doesn't mean that the whole of logic and science preclude it. Now you obviously don’t think God can be omnipotent because you think he could not create the universe out of nothing. But me? I’m an agnostic … meaning that maybe he could? ;)

danda
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by danda » Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:20 am

this is not hard to understand.

Draw a teeny tiny circle in the center of a page. shade in the rest of the page.

label the small circle: microcosm, observable universe. label the rest of the page: macrocosm, entire universe.

Now imagine that the page extends outward... forever.

God, if such exists, would exist somewhere on the page, outside the tiny circle labeled microcosm.

If that is not clear enough for you, I can't help you.

BeAChooser
Posts: 1049
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:24 am

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by BeAChooser » Tue Mar 07, 2023 2:19 am

danda wrote: Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:20 am If that is not clear enough for you, I can't help you.
It's a two way street. If what I noted isn't clear enough for you, I can't help you ... and in my opinion you're just playing word games.

danda
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by danda » Tue Mar 07, 2023 2:55 pm

Now you obviously don’t think God can be omnipotent because you think he could not create the universe out of nothing. But me? I’m an agnostic … meaning that maybe he could? ;)
If God exists, then already there is something, not nothing. as I use/understand the word nothing.

The title of this thread is "What is absolute nothingness"? I already gave an answer, but here I will make it more succinct:

absolute nothingness is a hypothetical state in which no "thing" exists or ever can exist nada, zip, zilch. It is not "empty space" [1], because space implies a distance between two "things". Instead, it is the complete absence of any existence.

I know for a fact it is hypothetical because I think and therefore I am, as Descarte cleverly stated. I do not know for a fact that anything exists beyond my mind, whatever that is, but the very fact of "I am" means that something, (me) exists, and not absolute nothingness.

[1] empty space is not empty imo, only relatively less dense/energetic than baryonic matter, but still a medium that can transmit waves super efficiently and quickly, implying a high density.

BeAChooser
Posts: 1049
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:24 am

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by BeAChooser » Tue Mar 07, 2023 6:56 pm

So what exactly is the point of this discussion, since you seem to be saying that nothing can't exist. Just word games?

danda
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by danda » Wed Mar 08, 2023 4:00 am

not word games. logic. which hopefully can then lead to a better understanding of nature/reality/existence.

User avatar
vector369
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2020 3:45 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by vector369 » Sat Mar 11, 2023 11:25 am

The Theosophical Society have since started, and are part way through, a youtube series called Cosmogenisis (how the Cosmos came into creation). I think it may answer some of the questions raised here.

Pablo Sender quotes the same quote I quoted in the first post- zero contains all numbers. Nothing then, not being generally what we percieve as nothingness, which is relative. Maybe Absolute Nothingness is not the best term to describe this absolute- unless, maybe, you can separate it from the relative nothing we use to describe, say, an empty cup.

I was, at some point, going to return to this thread and share The Stanzas from The Secret Doctrine - Mme Blavatsky. As the series shares them, the summaries and more, I'll post that. Pablo talks of the difficulties of even discussing what cannot be conceptualised. It can only be approached negatively. One cannot asert what IT is but what IT is not. Symbolical language also speaks to inner senses rather than the intellectual mind.

Cosmogenisis - The Secret Doctrine
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLI7v ... V9aEsI4lRZ
The Secret Doctrine I & II might be worth your time if this series interests. I'm finding it to be a gripping watch!

Perhaps, I should look more into the Aboriginal story of creation. One question that remains for me, amongst many: how many of these Cosmic out breaths, which bring the Universe into manifestation, have their been? The Native Australian Myth seems to be suggesting that "for aeons The Spirit of All Life dwelled in the nothing". This could be alluding to the sleep period or is suggesting that manifestation never occurred. The Secret Docrine suggests that this is the way it has always been and that manifestation is almost a necessity after rest. The Aboriginal Myth also suggests that, at first, there was only Air/Fire/Water. Interesting as this may not require planets which bring the elements of Earth/Wood.

It is suggested that there are several realms of existence becoming more dense until the physical realm we find ourselves. So, both the above maybe right. As we are now existing on the physical plane, we are nearing the end of this current Cosmic out breath.

(My take) Having wondered about space and the Big Bang- Cosmogenesis does not support the Big Bang as everything starting from one point in space/time. Sometimes wonder if the idea of the Big Bang was taken from these philosophical concepts of everything coming from "nothing" but that it was misconstrued and bent to fit. Space is like the nothing in that it doesn't move per se (from vid) but things do move through it. In sleep the Absolute contains the potential of abstract space which, in opposition to nothingness, should therefore be infinte. Both nothingness and infinity being beyond human conception, intellectually speaking. It seems to be suggesting that space is always there and infinite but "asleep" and that when it wakes, all of space awakens (with plasma?).

Tricky to put any of this into words ..

danda
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by danda » Thu Mar 16, 2023 12:23 am

Perhaps the Socratic method can guide us...

1. Can something (matter) come from nothing?

2. Is there a smallest unit beyond which matter cannot be further sub-divided?

3. Is there likely to be a boundary around matter beyond which nothing exists?

4. Can matter turn into nothing?

5. Is matter observed to be homogenous as it gets smaller or as it gets larger?

6. If the answer to all of the above is 'no' then what kind of cosmos can fit these parameters?


and a bonus q: What would the "sky" look like if one were somehow standing on an electron inside a water molecule inside the ocean? Or a gas molecule in the sky? Or an iron molecule in a hammer? How big would the "observable universe" be for the electron observer vs the "observable universe" that we can see?

danda
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: What is absolute nothingness?

Unread post by danda » Thu Mar 16, 2023 1:10 am

vector369 wrote: Sat Mar 11, 2023 11:25 am It is suggested that there are several realms of existence becoming more dense until the physical realm we find ourselves. So, both the above maybe right. As we are now existing on the physical plane, we are nearing the end of this current Cosmic out breath.
So I don't believe in the "higher dimensions" stuff that has been in vogue for decades. But I do have a couple thoughts on "realms of existence".

1. energy / electromagnetic spectrum. consider that our eyes only detect a small slice of the em spectrum. So we cannot directly observe microwaves, vlfs, xrays, gamma rays, etc, etc. We can build meters and detectors, but they are usually very primitive things with needles or digital readouts, different from the complex images our brains form from visible spectrum inputs. An exception to this would be night-vision goggles which allow us to literally see infra-red wavelengths. One could argue that night-vision goggles let us enter a sort of alternate existence. For a while I've been thinking it would be cool to create similar goggles to view microwaves and other wavelengths. So for example, one could visibly see in realtime the energy streaming out from a wifi-router, cell-phone, microwave oven, 5g tower, bluetooth device, and so on. Even the human body, which has an associated energy field. I think people would think about and treat transmitting devices differently if we could literally see the emanations as glowing hot bulbs/flames/streams. And we might treat eachother differently also if we could visibly see our energy fields (aura? soul?) changing with our emotions, mood.

edit: somebody made a very crude version to visualize microwaves in free space, not realtime: https://hackaday.com/2015/09/08/see-act ... faking-it/
edit2: this seems more viable/practical: https://www.wired.com/2013/01/new-metamaterial-camera/

2. scale. My particular lense/understanding of the cosmos is that of an infinite fractal. So our entire galaxy may be the equivalent of an atom at a higher, larger scale (realm) of reality. and likewise, every one of our atoms may be a galaxy at a lower/smaller scale. and so on, up and down, forever. So in this sense then, we would have an infinity of "realms" within and around us. We are literally composed of them. But we could never enter a realm at a smaller or larger scale. So then, they co-exist in the same space in a way, but it is senseless to think about moving between realms.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest