maybe i am putting to much thought into this.......or maybe not enough @.@ .... either way, i seem to of hit a brick wall, and i cant find a answer that makes sense to me.

 

what is the space between a nucleus and its particles? from my research thus far, it seems people think the space between them is literally "nothing".

does this sound really stupid to anyone else or is it just me? i must be missing something.

 

the way i see it, its impossible for the space to be "nothing"....if it were nothing, then that very space of "nothing" would not exist, thus, there would not be any type of space between a nucleus and its particles. right?

 

on top of all that, whats up with the space between two atoms? not talking about the space between the nucleus and its particles, but rather the entire atoms them selves. pretend you have a box, now imagine that you removed everything thing from inside it, literally everything. then you put 2 separate atoms inside it....are these 2 atoms separate from each other? if there is "nothing" between the two atoms, then how can they truly be separate if "nothing" separates them? it seems they would have to be connected in some way. if "nothing" separates them, it should be impossible for 2 separate atoms to interact with each other.

 

to take this a step further, i cant help but to wonder as to what in the world do all the atoms of the universe exist in o.0

 

if "nothing" is truly a space absence of atoms, then how can anything exist? .....its hard to explain what i mean >.< but ill still try....

 

firstly, throw all logic and reason out the window, that type of thing is useless in the place we are going lol.

 

imagine that you scale yourself down to the size of a atom ( doesnt matter if its impossible to exist in scale that small, just go with it)

now, walk up to a random atom and pluck it away from all other atoms. now run away into the darkness until your completely alone with your new friend

( the atom you stole) look around, there is no other atoms in sight, so if "nothing" is a space that has no atoms or particles, then the atom you stole is literally existing inside of "nothingness" .......we might as well not even exist at all, its like everything is actually "nothing"............ WHAT THE F@ science.

 

i must be missing some crucial piece of evidence because from what i understand, this S#%& does not make any sense.

 

also, if "nothing" really is between atoms, then why do atoms not collapse into each other from there gravitational pull? how can "nothing" be a force strong enough to separate atoms?

Edited May 21, 20178 yr by xxsolarplexx

There can be space without particles in it. It's not ''nothing'', it's just empty space.

While vacuum doesn't exist on a large scale, it seems (to me) that micro-vacuums (what you are talking about) are everywhere.

 

The folks explained it in this thread:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/96915-why-isnt-the-statement-there-is-no-perfect-vacuum-in-space-logicallymathematically-flawed/

 

There can be space without particles in it. It's not ''nothing'', it's just empty space.

While vacuum doesn't exist on a large scale, it seems (to me) that micro-vacuums (what you are talking about) are everywhere.

 

The folks explained it in this thread:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/96915-why-isnt-the-statement-there-is-no-perfect-vacuum-in-space-logicallymathematically-flawed/

 

 

Good enough. +1

 

also, if "nothing" really is between atoms, then why do atoms not collapse into each other from there gravitational pull? how can "nothing" be a force strong enough to separate atoms?

Gravity is far to weak to have any measureable effect.

the way i see it, its impossible for the space to be "nothing"....if it were nothing, then that very space of "nothing" would not exist, thus, there would not be any type of space between a nucleus and its particles. right?

 

 

You seem to be confusing two things: space and what that space contains. The space can't be nothing, it is ... well, space. The space could contain nothing though.

 

And that is the old "planetary" model of atoms: a nucleus with electrons orbiting it like little moons. But now we know that model is wrong and the electrons are actually distributed like a cloud around the nucleus. So there is no empty space in the atom; it is all full of electron.

 

And, like space everywhere, it is also full of virtual particles popping in and out of existence.

 

 

 

also, if "nothing" really is between atoms, then why do atoms not collapse into each other from there gravitational pull? how can "nothing" be a force strong enough to separate atoms?

 

To simplify enormously, the repulsion of negative charges of their electrons hold them apart. (On the other hand, it is also the electrons that bond atoms together in molecules.)

Many overlapping fields, according to QFT.

These fields are responsible for all the 'excitations' we call particles.

Even in the total absence/influence of any particles, the quantized scalar field for vacuum energy is still responsible for virtual particles.

Many overlapping fields, according to QFT.

These fields are responsible for all the 'excitations' we call particles.

Even in the total absence/influence of any particles, the quantized scalar field for vacuum energy is still responsible for virtual particles.

Excellent answer +1

aaahhh, i see, you guys are all bosses. now every thing in the universe is back to being all rainbows and unicorns lol.

Yep according to Strange they are usually pink.

From a quick read of the OP the answer to what is empty space, is "spacetime".

If you ask what is that, we don't exactly know. But we know that it has properties called spatial dimensions, and time.

 

So I have to agree that empty space isn't "nothing" otherwise it wouldn't have the dimensions, and two metres of it would equal ten metres, there would be no difference, as 2x0 = 10x0