[sciguy1]

im not sure if this has ever been though about before, but i was doing some thinking about where everything came from, and i was wondering
what if there was a law saying that there can not be nothing, so upon the being of nothing, the universe will create something out of nothing to fill that space.
Im not sure if it makes sense i just know that people have never been able to have a space truly filled with nothing, and i just though that seemed relevant.

[Tres Juicy]

sciguy1, on 15 December 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

im not sure if this has ever been though about before, but i was doing some thinking about where everything came from, and i was wondering
what if there was a law saying that there can not be nothing, so upon the being of nothing, the universe will create something out of nothing to fill that space.
Im not sure if it makes sense i just know that people have never been able to have a space truly filled with nothing, and i just though that seemed relevant.

To my knowledge we have never actually found "nothing" even in the best vacuum we can create

http://en.wikipedia....irtual_particle

Virtual particles also kind of lend themselves to this

[URAIN]

sciguy1, on 15 December 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

im not sure if this has ever been though about before, but i was doing some thinking about where everything came from, and i was wondering
what if there was a law saying that there can not be nothing, so upon the being of nothing, the universe will create something out of nothing to fill that space.
Im not sure if it makes sense i just know that people have never been able to have a space truly filled with nothing, and i just though that seemed relevant.

What do you mean by nothing? Do you mean NOTHING = SPACE

Lots of people think like this.

According to the P.P.Principle NOTHING has never existed in this universe, at any time.

(This has never existed in past, not existed in present and will never exist in future also.)


Other than this NOTHING every thing is existence.

About this theory discussion has done in this forums 'speculation' also and accepted about NOTHING has never existed. Followed is the theory link.

(It is used to find the base for reincarnation but it may used to other than reincarnation)

http://baseforreinca....wordpress.com/

speculation links

speculation link 1
speculation link 2

This post has been edited by URAIN: 15 December 2011 - 11:46 AM

[Airbrush]

Very interesting. Something does not come from nothing. What may appear to be nothing is actually something.

[EWyatt]

URAIN, on 15 December 2011 - 11:38 AM, said:

According to the P.P.Principle NOTHING has never existed in this universe, at any time.

If NOTHING has never existed, how then did ANYTHING come to exist in the first place? Note: by ANYTHING, I mean energy too!

[36grit]

I contemplated this idea once. The closest thing I could find to nothing is the space between electron orbits. This is the only true vacuum I could come up with. Nothing exists there, not even time. The electrons quantum leap right over it and never skip a beat. Complete and absolute energy obselent distance.

[DrRocket]

sciguy1, on 15 December 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

im not sure if this has ever been though about before, but i was doing some thinking about where everything came from, and i was wondering
what if there was a law saying that there can not be nothing, so upon the being of nothing, the universe will create something out of nothing to fill that space.
Im not sure if it makes sense i just know that people have never been able to have a space truly filled with nothing, and i just though that seemed relevant.

I, on the other hand, am pretty sure.

[Tres Juicy]

36grit, on 16 December 2011 - 03:24 AM, said:

I contemplated this idea once. The closest thing I could find to nothing is the space between electron orbits. This is the only true vacuum I could come up with. Nothing exists there, not even time. The electrons quantum leap right over it and never skip a beat. Complete and absolute energy obselent distance.

I'd be willing to bet that there's something there

[URAIN]

EWyatt, on 16 December 2011 - 12:37 AM, said:

If NOTHING has never existed, how then did ANYTHING come to exist in the first place? Note: by ANYTHING, I mean energy too!

I think that will be say in my third theory. (This is my first theory)

36grit, on 16 December 2011 - 03:24 AM, said:

I contemplated this idea once. The closest thing I could find to nothing is the space between electron orbits. This is the only true vacuum I could come up with. Nothing exists there, not even time. The electrons quantum leap right over it and never skip a beat. Complete and absolute energy obselent distance.

Again here (as I said in my 1st post of the topic) your meaning for 'nothing' is space.

Please don't call the space as the nothing.


Did you have not read the theory or speculations?


(Edit) If we consider 'nothing' as a word, then this word is also not 'nothing'. It is something, because 'nothing' word is existed.

We will not identify it by any words or signs or by anything. Identification for the 'nothing' is only done by the things which are existed now or existed at past.

The real nothing is out of imagination.

* We imagine the things in the way related to which was existed before and which are existed now.

* Our imaginations are the continuations of the past existence or present existence.

* There is no real new or real end. All things existed for ever.

* But we know something and much is left unknown or from not knowing.


(which are existed before or which are existed past, means presently we don't know about these. But now also they have existed.)

This post has been edited by URAIN: 16 December 2011 - 01:56 PM

[Phi for All]

URAIN, on 15 December 2011 - 11:38 AM, said:

What do you mean by nothing? Do you mean NOTHING = SPACE

Lots of people think like this.

According to the P.P.Principle NOTHING has never existed in this universe, at any time.

(This has never existed in past, not existed in present and will never exist in future also.)


Other than this NOTHING every thing is existence.

About this theory discussion has done in this forums 'speculation' also and accepted about NOTHING has never existed. Followed is the theory link.

(It is used to find the base for reincarnation but it may used to other than reincarnation)

http://baseforreinca....wordpress.com/

speculation links

speculation link 1
speculation link 2

!

Moderator Note

Do NOT hijack someone else's thread to promote your own. This is against the rules you agreed to when you joined.

Also, please do yourself a favor and read up on what constitutes a scientific "theory". You are misusing the word here.

Response to this modnote is unnecessary.

[Tres Juicy]

http://www.newscient...mpty-space.html

Some interesting stuff here

This post has been edited by Tres Juicy: 16 December 2011 - 02:21 PM

[swansont]

The OP is not a new idea. There is the notion, from Frank Wilczek (and perhaps others) that 'nothing' is unstable.

[Tres Juicy]

How would you even get to nothing?

Even if you could create a perfect vacuum with nothing but space inside it, how do you then go about removing the space?!

[URAIN]

swansont, on 16 December 2011 - 03:24 PM, said:

The OP is not a new idea. There is the notion, from Frank Wilczek (and perhaps others) that 'nothing' is unstable.

Do I know, your view about 'nothing' ?

What do you mean by the 'nothing' ? and Unstabel means what ?

[36grit]

nothing=my contemplations on nothing. On the otherhand, scooby snacks = everything

[Airbrush]

URAIN, on 17 December 2011 - 09:58 AM, said:

Do I know, your view about 'nothing' ?

What do you mean by the 'nothing' ? and Unstabel means what ?

Unstable means not long lasting. If "nothing" existed anywhere, it would be like a magnet, or vacuum, for anything else. It would decay to something very fast.

[Tres Juicy]

Airbrush, on 20 December 2011 - 01:06 AM, said:

Unstable means not long lasting. If "nothing" existed anywhere, it would be like a magnet, or vacuum, for anything else. It would decay to something very fast.

Could this explain the expansion of the universe?

[michel123456]

swansont, on 16 December 2011 - 03:24 PM, said:

The OP is not a new idea. There is the notion, from Frank Wilczek (and perhaps others) that 'nothing' is unstable.

Thanks for the info.
Wilczek's ideas are supported by particle physicist Victor John Stenger.
Following link to a pdf article of Stenger entitled "Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?"
http://www.google.gr...EmN14qh6XudhyYA

This post has been edited by michel123456: 30 December 2011 - 04:51 PM

[merlin wood]

A requiremt for a theory of everything could be that it should explain, in terms of cause and effect, how the universe is of a certain form as radiant energy, atoms and molecules of the elements and compounds of matter, species of living organisms, galaxies of stars and planetary systems, and groups, clusters and walls of galaxies around cosmic voids. Also, given that the universe has expanded over some 13.7 billion years from a very small and dense ‘Big Bang’ origin, the theory should account for how this expansion and its measured acceleration occurred, and how the universe evolved into its form as astronomically observed.

Does any recognized theory in physics look like it could achieve this?

[Airbrush]

merlin wood, on 4 January 2012 - 01:52 PM, said:

A requiremt for a theory of everything could be that it should explain, in terms of cause and effect, how the universe is of a certain form as radiant energy, atoms and molecules of the elements and compounds of matter, species of living organisms, galaxies of stars and planetary systems, and groups, clusters and walls of galaxies around cosmic voids. Also, given that the universe has expanded over some 13.7 billion years from a very small and dense ‘Big Bang’ origin, the theory should account for how this expansion and its measured acceleration occurred, and how the universe evolved into its form as astronomically observed.

Does any recognized theory in physics look like it could achieve this?

The Big Bang theory is as close as we can get. If you can figure out a single theory of "everything", then you deserve a nobel prize!

This post has been edited by Airbrush: 6 January 2012 - 12:31 AM