Topic awaiting preservation: just something i was thinking about.. (Page 1 of 2)

Is it really possible for space to exist? As I understand it, space is just the empty *nothingness* out there, between celestial bodies like stars, planets, and the sort. So is it possible for something that is nothing to exist? Or is it just something we give a label to better understand it, like time?

Is there an astrophysicist in the house?!?

I really don't know, Raptor. There was an awesome thread here quite a while ago now discussing astrophysics and the speed of light and such like. I was blown away by the level of discussion that went on. Perhaps some of the participants of that will grace us with their knowledge on the subject.

What came to my mind when I first read your question was the theories about dark matter.

. . : slicePuzzle

Raptor: I suppose I'm being a pedant but space exists what you are talking about is vacuum. Although it is supposed to be the absence of things (depeding on how you measure it) it is rarely completely empty (specks of dust, etc.) and thats not including all those pesky things like planets and stuff.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Assuming that you are talking about absolute space, that is the total absence of matter, energy, etc...what you really want to know is, is there a 'fabric' of space? In that case, it depends...I believe that Stephan Hawkins explains that relatively well in his books...but that is, of course, all just theory...

Apparently Einstein alludes to the point that space must consist of something, in order for his gravity model to work...however, that is yet to be proven...

So to wrap things up...space remains factually undefined...theories abound, but they have yet to be proven...

To paraphrase Erma Bombeck, there are two kinds of matter in the universe -- the light kind which is attracted to dark objects and the dark kind which is attracted to light objects.

So therefore, to see the dark matter we must change the universe's background color. <universe style="background-color: #fff;"> Hmmm. Needs a little work.

Seriously, just as with time, I think our understanding of space is limited by our perceptual senses. Consider that lights along a shoreline at night seem to be much closer than they turn out to be. Applying the same optical phenomenon to our perception space could mean that objects in this universe are closer than they appear. Curvature of space-time could account for a similar illusion.

Quantum mechanics on a macroscopic scale could provide another explanation. The position of everything is both everywhere and nowhere until observed. Observation fixes its state and position.

E=mc2 could provide an answer. If there is no difference between matter and energy, then energy must have mass just as matter does. I read somewhere that the Earth is struck by 4.5 pounds of sunlight every day. We're an awfully small target. How much does all its light weigh?

Finally, our understanding of gravity has progressed little since Newton. We don't know how it works or why it works so well over vast distances.

Until we have a complete understanding of gravity, mass, energy and quantum mechanics we will remain unable to explain space and time. And it may likely require fundemental changes in the way we percieve things through our bodies senses.

Meanwhile it's fun to theorize. Who knows? Maybe Erma Bombeck has it all over the physicists.




"the most incredible feats are often accomplished by
those who have had the most incredible challenges"

"Or is it just something we give a label to better understand it, like time? "

short and sweet--it' just a label

~ZERO IS NOT A NUMBER~

.

ed: playing with [IP logged]

[This message has been edited by flashtongue (edited 05-29-2002).]

God, I am really not in the mood to give my theory of space/sound/light/energy right now, try another day like when I get back into the states

Did someone say astrophysicist? Well I am your man! Ever since I read the book sphere/saw the movie, I have been dangerously facinated in the likeness of marine bio' and quantum physics/astronomy.

Dark matter? Negative energy? Stephen Hawking?
How did he get in my post looks like he can do anything.

Well raptor, holding off untill I get to the states, I will mention to you that nothing is something, thats why there is a word for it. You are asking if it's possible for nothing to exist, well yes it is. The reason scientists labeled what we know as "space" today as "space" is because that is really what it is, a bunch of empty space. Space is the absence of something, like when you are in a room filled with nothing you have a lot of free "space." But then you could say that there is oxygen for us to breath within the room which is why I asume you proposed the question because space has no oxygen. Well if you know it or not there is gas all over space just scattered around from supernovas to stars to galaxies beyond. But the "space" between us (us as in galaxy to galaxy) exists only in theory because it isn't theoretically physical but clearly visible.

I hope that answered your philisophical question

brucew: Let me say that you are very intelligent in the feild of astrophysics , but I must disagree with your statement that we don't know why gravity works. True that we do not entirely know why it works or to the fact as to what it really is besides an unexplained force, but it works because things have mass and mass attracts. Why it works is the unexplained part but we do have somewhat an explination for what gravity is and how it works, but of course this is all in theory.

flashtounge: sorry but zero is a number "0"



[This message has been edited by InSiDeR (edited 05-29-2002).]

0 is not a number, and .999999999999999999999999999999999... != 1

InSiDeR: We're saying the same thing. You've stated it more clearly and fleshed it out a bit more.

"the most incredible feats are often accomplished by
those who have had the most incredible challenges"

Sorry raptor, but 0.9999...(infinate) does in fact equal 1.

I disagree. I *have* seen the arguments for it, but they don't quite convince me

I hope we are not going to do a 'convince me' thread....

That said, back to space...it must be something, or Einsteins model of gravity doesn't work...'nothing' can't, by definition, be affected...and Einsteins gravity theory suggests that the 'fabric' of space is affected by mass...therefore, it must be something...

As to why we haven't really been able to prove many of these theories...well, we are relatively young, as a species, and many of these theories are also young...until we really spread out into space, and can start to do real research in space, there will be questions (IMHO).

Personally, I hope the 'space-explosion' occurs within my lifetime...quite exciting, the idea...

Space explosion? What's that?

. . : slicePuzzle

Where humanity comes to a technological advancement that allows easy access to space exploration...thus a 'space-explosion'...think of all the groups that are just iching for the chance to go somewhere else, to uphold and practice their beliefs...

Oh that! Yeah, it would be awesome to live to see that. Assuming the world continues long enough, I'm sure that day will come for humanity. I personally believe we will inherit the stars for it is only another ocean to cross.

I was just reading a book review about Project Orion that describes the plans drawn up in the sixties for a spaceship capable of navigating our solar system. It's designed to use successive hydrogen bomb explosions as a method of propulsion. Cool stuff!!!

. . : slicePuzzle

Thats pretty cool bugs! WS thankyou for sharing that with us

edit:

Zero = 0 = #

Hmm If i remember correctly there were branches to numbers like real and imaginary numbers, rational and irratoinal numbers, zero I think is a rational number thus making it a number



[This message has been edited by InSiDeR (edited 05-29-2002).]

Actually, 0 is not a number...it is a place holder. A number is always defined, and as 0 is undefined, is by definition not a number...

Don't believe it? Divide 1 by 0...it's undefined...

@Bugs...yeah, I read all about that...I think the engineer was a guy named Dyson...but I'm not sure...Dyson designed a lot of interesting stuff....

And then there is ion propulsion and the solar sail...

haha i need a Mad Scientist Slimey!



zero is not a number... its the absence of a number. Its like calling black a color... everyone does it, but it is incorrect.

Okay space is definatly not empty. Space is wonderously full of stuff! Big stuff, like stars and galaxies and universes(maybe not too many of those, haha!) and novas and black holes and quasars and other "Real Fucking Big Things." Space is also full of medium sized things, like astroids, and planets, and little stars, and comets, and flowers, and humans, and space ships, and rocks! Yay rocks! Then there is the small things, like gasses, which are out there, but don't really get in the way, and other "small shit." Then there is the really goddamn hard to see small stuff. Radiation is fun! So thats things like light, radio, etc etc... Then there is stuff that is small. Like quarks. Whatever...

Okay, so to begin with you have to define empty. Starting with something easy, is the earths atmosphere empty? Is a brick of gold empty? They both have "empty" spots in them(maybe, if you look hard enough). Is the space between the discrete particles of an atom empty? Is the space between the three quarks in a proton empty? Is there space? So then going up and up, our galaxy has a lot of shit in it, like i said before, If you step far enough back, I'm sure it looks like a point source, so stepping farther back, is the space between our galaxy and the next galaxy empty? We can observe the next galaxy, so it can't be empty, it must be full of radiation... So stepping farther back, is the space between this part of the universe and the next part of the universe empty? So then we get pretty much to the limit, and the final question, which is: Whats beyond our universe, which must be where all the nothingness is. Then i take mr schroedinger's law and extrapolate that what we can't observe, exists in all possible forms, and i take that a step farther and say that what we don't observe, DOESN'T MATTER(hahahahahahaha). So is there nothing, sure, in between your ears. Goddamn i love this infinity type stuff.

*sigh* ws try dividing 0 by 1 and then u get 0, yea black shmack its the absence of all numbers, but zero is a number i tell u

Well, found this...

quote:

---

Date: 10 Jan 1995 03:48:57 -0500
From: Dr. Sydney
Subject: Re: Ask a question

Dear David,

Hello! I'm glad you wrote to Dr. Math. The concept of zero is
surprisingly deep, and it took human thinkers quite a long time to come up
with the notion of zero. In fact, though mathematicians began thinking
about the concept of zero in 2000-1800 B.C.E., it was not until about 200-300
B.C.E. that the Babylonians began using a symbol that would evolve into
what we today know as zero.

It turns out that mathematicians first thought of zero in the
context of writing numbers down -- zero was first a placeholder. Before
mathematicians understood the notion of zero, there was much ambiguity
about written numbers. For instance, if the symbol for 5 was written down,
there was no way to tell what number was being expressed -- was it 5?
Or, 50? Or, 5,000,000? Thus, zero was introduced as a placeholder to avoid
these ambiguities.

In India, the concepts of 0 as a placeholder and 0 as a number were
associated with one another much earlier than in Babylon. It is from the
Indians that we get our present-day symbol for 0.

I don't have an exact definition for 0 here with me at home. I can
tell you this: when working with sets or groups of elements under some
defined operation of addition, the "zero element" is defined as the element,
let's call it z, such that a + z = a for all a in the set or group. So, one
definition you could use for 0 is that 0 + x = x for all real numbers x.
Alternatively, you might define 0 as the number in between the positive and
negative numbers. Or, maybe you could define 0 as lacking quantity (that's
what the dictionary says!) What do you think about these different
definitions? If you are looking for a different definition, write us back,
and we'll try to find a better one.

I hope this helps. Write back if you have any questions.

--Sydney, Dr. "whoa" math

---

Still doesn't answer the question: is zero a number? It appears that there are a lot of opinions on whether or not zero is a number...but no-one has been able to actually prove that it is a number....

Interesting.

[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 05-30-2002).]

...

conspiracy theory!!

I would think, common sense wise, that 0 is a number representing nothing. So therefor since it represents something it is a number. A number that represents the absense of anything.

-^^-
--::--
\___/

heh, then prove it...or show me the proof...something that no-one has succeeded in doing...I'm sure you will get some sort of prize....and a nice cushy job....and have enough power to influence the world....pretty good incentives, if you ask me...

What if all I want is a cookie? Could I still give it a crack?

njuice42
icq 957255

Lets change perspective for a second. I *believe* (I'm not sure) that the word "space" is used to indicate a lack of matter. Matter can travel through it and exist within it, but "it" doesn't actually exist. Just think about what's beyond the Universe - nothing. It's not lack of matter, it's void. Null.

It's a really deep topic which I don't quite have the writing skills to express, but it is very interesting, nontheless.

Hmm now I see and understand more clearly on the matter of 0 WS. Now I can relate to what I said about space .

~=OK=~

Nothing is something, thats why there is a word for it, when there is an absence of something there is nothing, much like zero, when there are no whole numbers/integers/decimals/fractions left in resume then we define that as zero which is why zero has to be a number. When the 0 added after the 5 you get a 50, which means 5 10's. Now we look at 10, the 1 and the 0, 10 means 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1, all those 1's can be written as a 10. The zero is indeed a place holder, it is the difference between 1 and 10. When zero is added you get a x(10) value like 5(10) would be 50. Thus concluding why zero is a number,...

Insider: But nothing and zero are two totally diffrent things aren't they? The idea of Zero didn't come about untill about 1,000 years after basic math, and the greeks were doing advanced algebra without a zero untill very late in their civilization. But nothing. Now nothing is a diffrent story...Nothing means the absence of something, right? And if their is no "something" then that area of space would just be null. According to dictionart.com, null is defined as:

quote:

---

Amounting to nothing; absent or nonexistent: a null result.

---

That means that space is nonexistant, right? No, thats not true. It's all very baffling. My opinion is that it is just there, yet it takes up no space, which is how it could be infinite. Anybody read the book Xenocide? In that they describe space as being there, but no there. In other words, space takes up no space, yet it exists. In my opinion, space is very incomprehendable.

incomprehendable? nah its easy just go have a conversation with stephan hawking

Insider wrote:

quote:

---

Nothing is something, thats why there is a word for it,

---

Is a thought something? Does it take up space?

I didn't say "something" had to take up space did I but if you want the smart-ass response I can do that... Well when you think about it (how redundant of me) it does move your brain juices :barf:

a thought takes up space in your brain

in one sense space is defineable
i.e. the space inside your brain
but, what occupies that space
...?

as our sphere of understanding grows
so does our contact with the unknown

infinity?

or leap of faith?

"So is it possible for something that is nothing to exist? Or is it just something we give a label to better understand it, like time? "

do you think it just coincidence that zero is represented by 0?

by symbol I think 0 is understandable for the likes of zero, a circle/oval

How about this: Zero is nothing and nothing is zero, but zero is nothing but nothing is zero...Scientist nowadays don't really have an explanation for nothing, or infinity, do they? (that wasn't retoricle) I think that we have a word to represent nothingness because we need a way to explain it.

_____,,,_<0\/0>_,,,_______
_______________________
___/counterfeitbacon\____
___\counterfeitbacon/____

I think you guys are confused here. Zero is zero - the number between -1 and 1. Nothing being the abscence of physical matter, is nothing. Nothing != zero. You are thinking that zero doesn't exist when in fact, absolute zero does not exist.



[This message has been edited by synax (edited 05-31-2002).]

Still waiting for someone to prove that 0 is a number. Think about it...some of the best mathwhizzes have bitten their teeth out on this one...until that German mathwhizz just said '0 is undefined!'.

Now, think about it. A number is that which divided by itself is 1. So what is 0 divided by 0? Undefined...so it is not a number.

Also, consider that one can get along without 0...it's not really all that necessary...but one needs numbers...

As for space...clearly, something that can't be registered by the five senses can't exist...or can it? Well, if space is nothing...then Einsteins Gravity model is wrong...because he states that mass has an effect on space...therefore it must be something...we just can't register it with our senses...but we can see the 'side-effects'....sort of like a black hole...you can't see it, but you can see the 'side-effects' of it...make sense now?

I think that we should leave it up to the German mathwizz, but anyway, I feel zero is a number or it would not be on the number pad of my computer.



-^^-
--::--
\___/

QUOTATION: I was continuing to shrink. To become, what? The infinitesimal? What was I? Still a human being, or was I the man of the future?... So close, the infinitesimal and the infinite, but suddenly I knew they were really the two ends of the same concept. The unbelievably small and the unbelievably vast eventually meet, like the closing of a gigantic circle. I looked up, as if somehow I would grasp the heavens. The universe, worlds beyond number, God?s silver tapestry spread across the night. And in that moment I knew the answer to the riddle of the infinite. I had thought in terms of man?s own limited dimension. I had presumed upon nature. That existence begins and ends is man?s conception, not nature?s, and I felt my body dwindling, melting, becoming nothing. My fears melted away and in their place came acceptance. All this vast majesty of creation?it had to mean something. And then I meant something, too. Yes, smaller than the smallest?I meant something, too. To God, there is no zero. I still exist.

ATTRIBUTION: Friedrich Dürrenmatt (1921?1990), Swiss dramatist, novelist, essayist, Jack Arnold, and Trans. by Gerhard P. Knapp (1995). Romulus the Great, act I (1956).

CFB: sorry but I have a habbit of doing this, *rhetorical

WS: zero is nothing, nothing is something, if zero is something then its considerably a number.. I kind of like gilberts interpretation of 0

Insider: you keep saying zero is nothing when that's not true. Zero is ZERO. Null is nothing.

Nope. Zero (0) is Undefined...and as such, is not a number...what you may believe to the contrary, is your business, I suppose...but then, so are all beliefs. I'm talking about actually proving it...and to that (and this surprises me that nobody brought it up as a counter argument), it can't be proved that zero is not a number...so it is truly 'undefined'...and until proved, one way or another, remains 'not a number'...

Don't you just love loose ends...