Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

59589Re: [existlist] Re: Mething Nothing

Expand Messages
  • wsindarius
    Mar 24, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      Yes, that is Krauss' view as well. In fact, he says that contemporary physics has shown that that Nothing has a quantum instability and an energy -- and that it even has something like a weight to it. I have no dispute with that, and I find the physics interesting.

      What I am saying is that that is not the Ontological issue behind the 'why is there Being?'; it is the cosmological question of 'what is the nature of extension?' (i.e., does extension need stuff to be, and can stuff be thus secondary to our cosmological origin at a singularity, etc.).

      But the Ontological question has a logical priority, and in that sense it has an urgency to it, to answer an earlier objection. Thus, when Krauss demotes the philosophical questions as so much quasi-religion that have been dismissed by the above physics, I am saying that HE is playing know-it-all, as it were, and has missed the more radical issue.


      -----Original Message-----
      From: fictiveparrot <knott12@...>
      To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Sun, Mar 24, 2013 4:44 pm
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Mething Nothing

      > Oh I see now, not at all similar but opposite.

      It was indeed my suggestion that nothing was an absolute state of rest... perhaps beyond what is considered 0° kelvin and more or less than Planck... or somewhere on the far end between the two where there seems to be difficulty measuring. A change of state, or where a change of state might be necessary. temperatures freeze where states change... but if we have not observed the change to what they change to perhaps we dont know what that is. We didn't know there was America till it was discovered either.

      The problem with idiot humans is that there is some sense that 5 senses are enough, or that those 5 can translate everything, or that they not only digest everything but digest it infallibly. I, of course, am not human, though I am bound by my at-least as limited imagination to being one. But nothing, one would assume, and from my perspective, has no energy of any type -- positive or negative. It has not volume or space or "thing". Strictly speaking by the understanding of observation and science -- which can be ridiculous.

      However, as not to necessarily counter the brilliant observations of those who know better, I don't know that I concede that nothing doesn't exist, even amidst us. in fact there may be a bout as much nothing as something -- depending how you count it. And like a table where you consider the space between the particles as space and not volume, there might indeed be more nothing than something -- well, or an equal amount possibly as well.

      All these people that know... it is like they smoke a drug of deception. They are worms in Alice's world changing the rules for their own good. And then they are so sure they are right and angry that all you are left with is an echo and pile of shoes where their feet used to be.

      I. Doubt

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic