The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
JSS
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 3:42 am

The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by JSS »

This mathematical proof involves hyperreal mathematics and detailed ontological construction techniques. If you are not deeply familiar with those, you might want to take it very slowly, thinking about and asking about each detail from the beginning to the end.

And note ahead of time that even though we begin speaking merely of random possibilities and infinitesimal probabilities, by the time we get to the end, an absolute impossibility has been established.

================================

Okay, now given that you have 10 cups with the random possibility of each cup having as many as 10 coins in it, what is the possibility that you have the same number of coins in all 10 cups?

Mathematically that would be (1/10)^10 or 0.0000000001.

The state of nothingness and the state of absolute homogeneity are actually the same thing. If there is no distinction in affect at all in every point in space, there is no universe. Thus for a universe to exist, there must be distinction or variation in affect between the points in space. What is the possibility that every point in space is of the exact same value of PtA (potential-to-affect)?

Well, let's define a term as the specific infinite series,
infA ≡ [1+1+1+...]

Just a single infinite line would give us infA^2 points on that line if you want to include all infinitesimal lengths, all "real numbers". And assuming nothing is forcing any particular PtA value, each point on the line might have a value anywhere from infinitesimal to infinite, the range of that same infA^2 but for PtA.

So the possibility for every point on the line to have the same PtA value (given steps of 1 infinitesimal) would be;
Possibility of homogeneous line = (1/infA)^((infA)^2).

That is 1 infinitesimal reduced by itself infinitely an infinite number of times. And right there is the issue. Also in 3D space, you actually have the infinite real-number cube (to simplify from spherical) of;
Possibility of homogeneous space = (1/infA)^(infA^6)

Normally in mathematics if your number has reached 1 infinitesimal, it is accepted as zero and is certainly close enough to zero for all practical purposes but we are literally infinitely less than infinity less than 1 infinitesimal. For 3D space, we are looking at 1 infinitesimal times itself infinitely an infinite number of times, infinitely times an infinite number more times, and infinitely times an infinite number more times.

Given an infinite amount of time (an infinite timeline, another infA^2 of points in time) and with or without causality, the possibility of running across homogeneity of space is;
Possibility of homogeneity through all space = (1/infA)^(infA^6)
Possibility of homogeneity through all time = (1/infA)^(infA^12)

With a possibility being that degree of infinitely small, not only can it never randomly end up homogeneous even through an infinite number of trials (an infinite time line, never getting up to even 1 infinitesimal possibility), but it can't even be forced to be homogeneous. A force is an affect. If all affects are identical, the total affect is zero. What would be left in existence to force all points to be infinitely identical?


But if that isn't good enough for you, realize that those calculations are based on stepped values of merely 1 infinitesimal using a standard of infA. In reality, each step would be as close to absolute zero as possible without actually being absolute zero using a standard of as close to absolute infinity as possible,
AbsInf ≡ highest possible number toward absolute infinity.

And then of course,
1/AbsInf = would be the lowest possible number or value.

Thus we have,
Possibility of homogeneity through all time = (1/AbsInf)^(Absinf^12)

Now we have truly absolute zero possibility because if we are already as close to absolute zero as possible with "1/AbsInf", as soon as we multiply that by any fraction, we have breached absolute zero, impossibly small. And we have breached absolute zero by a factor of AbsInf^12 ... well, well beyond absolute zero possibility of homogeneity.

Thus Absolute Homogeneity, "Nothingness", is absolutely impossible.

Thus no universe could have ever been at a state of absolute nothingness, a pre-Big-Bang state, nor can even the tiniest fraction of any universe ever be absolutely empty. Every point throughout all space and throughout all time is filled with affectance that merely changes in density and potential.

Exyz = p + a0dp/dt + a1dp²/dt² + a3dp³/dt³ + …

Or:
Image
Dalek Prime
Posts: 4922
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:48 am
Location: Living in a tree with Polly.

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dalek Prime »

And yet, no consciousness is nothingness. So what's does it matter? You have to bridge rationalism with idealism, and you're not. They both contain truths. And since this is a philosophy forum, and not a physics forum, this becomes important, and requires addressing, because all this matters not unless it can be observed.
JSS
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 3:42 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by JSS »

Dalek Prime wrote:And yet, no consciousness is nothingness. So what's does it matter? [not really]
You have to bridge rationalism with idealism, and you're not. [I do, but irrelevant]
They both contain truths. [perhaps, but irrelevant]
And since this is a philosophy forum, and not a physics forum, this becomes important, and requires addressing, because all this matters not unless it can be observed. [that would be for a SCIENCE forum, not physics, nor metaphysics]
...merely a series of unrelated and false presumptions, each without support or merit.
Dalek Prime
Posts: 4922
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:48 am
Location: Living in a tree with Polly.

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dalek Prime »

JSS wrote:
Dalek Prime wrote:And yet, no consciousness is nothingness. So what's does it matter? [not really]
You have to bridge rationalism with idealism, and you're not. [I do, but irrelevant]
They both contain truths. [perhaps, but irrelevant]
And since this is a philosophy forum, and not a physics forum, this becomes important, and requires addressing, because all this matters not unless it can be observed. [that would be for a SCIENCE forum, not physics, nor metaphysics]
...merely a series of unrelated and false presumptions, each without support or merit.
The only irrelevant thing here is anything without conscious observance. That you consider this false or irrelevant is your failing.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Nothingness cannot be known...Except in relation to Everything.

What is Everything?.... cannot be known either, except as concept, as language is dual by nature.

The paradox of duality is unavoidable, as the concept of oneness is inconceivable.

Any questions?
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Tautological nonesense.

Nothingness can contain no possibility, and "ever" is also content so its addition to the end of the sentence is at best redundant, at worst compounding the tautology to contradiction.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Tautological nonesense.

Nothingness can contain no possibility, and "ever" is also content so its addition to the end of the sentence is at best redundant, at worst compounding the tautology to contradiction.
All possibility is but cannot be known entirely in it's wholeness since it is infinite and therefore without beginning or end.

Time or the play of duality is what stops everything (all possibility) from happening at once.

There is infinite timeless knowing of everything; but no knower; since a knower implies two, and this timeless knowing one cannot step into the same river not even once.

There is no such thing known as ever. Ever just is...with out ever knowing it is.

This one has never known death(nothingness) therefore, can never know life (everything)

Life in this context is compared to a dream.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Greta »

I'm very simple. As far as I'm concerned there appears to have always been something - that's where the only evidence lies so far.

Still, as far as I can remember, there was nothingness before my earliest memory of sitting in a pram scribbling on a wall by the front door. Before then is a blank which is, I suppose, a kind of nothingness.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote:I'm very simple. As far as I'm concerned there appears to have always been something - that's where the only evidence lies so far.

Still, as far as I can remember, there was nothingness before my earliest memory of sitting in a pram scribbling on a wall by the front door. Before then is a blank which is, I suppose, a kind of nothingness.
Nothingness is still a knowing.

Do you see the dilemma of trying to know nothingness? It's like trying to describe silence without using words.

There is only blankness, this cannot be known since it is constantly being filled up with mind stuff, which in turn cannot be known, since no one has seen a mind. Therefore, everything known is a memory which is dead stuff.
Direct aliveness cannot be known, since it has passed away before it is ever realised.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Dontaskme wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Tautological nonesense.

Nothingness can contain no possibility, and "ever" is also content so its addition to the end of the sentence is at best redundant, at worst compounding the tautology to contradiction.
All possibility is but cannot be known entirely in it's wholeness since it is infinite and therefore without beginning or end.

Time or the play of duality is what stops everything (all possibility) from happening at once.

There is infinite timeless knowing of everything; but no knower; since a knower implies two, and this timeless knowing one cannot step into the same river not even once.

There is no such thing known as ever. Ever just is...with out ever knowing it is.

This one has never known death(nothingness) therefore, can never know life (everything)

Life in this context is compared to a dream.
This is a litany of confusion between cause and effect.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Dontaskme wrote:
Greta wrote:I'm very simple. As far as I'm concerned there appears to have always been something - that's where the only evidence lies so far.

Still, as far as I can remember, there was nothingness before my earliest memory of sitting in a pram scribbling on a wall by the front door. Before then is a blank which is, I suppose, a kind of nothingness.
Nothingness is still a knowing.

Do you see the dilemma ....
The only dilemma here is confusing the concept of the thing with the thing imagined.
"nothingness" is not a "knowing". Nothingness is not a thing at all, but an idea.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Dontaskme wrote:
Greta wrote:I'm very simple. As far as I'm concerned there appears to have always been something - that's where the only evidence lies so far.

Still, as far as I can remember, there was nothingness before my earliest memory of sitting in a pram scribbling on a wall by the front door. Before then is a blank which is, I suppose, a kind of nothingness.
Nothingness is still a knowing.

Do you see the dilemma ....
The only dilemma here is confusing the concept of the thing with the thing imagined.
"nothingness" is not a "knowing". Nothingness is not a thing at all, but an idea.
What's an idea?

All things known are an idea.

That which is not known can never be an idea.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Dontaskme »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Dontaskme wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Tautological nonesense.

Nothingness can contain no possibility, and "ever" is also content so its addition to the end of the sentence is at best redundant, at worst compounding the tautology to contradiction.
All possibility is but cannot be known entirely in it's wholeness since it is infinite and therefore without beginning or end.

Time or the play of duality is what stops everything (all possibility) from happening at once.

There is infinite timeless knowing of everything; but no knower; since a knower implies two, and this timeless knowing one cannot step into the same river not even once.

There is no such thing known as ever. Ever just is...with out ever knowing it is.

This one has never known death(nothingness) therefore, can never know life (everything)

Life in this context is compared to a dream.
This is a litany of confusion between cause and effect.
There is nothing to be known outside the field of cause and effect, since nothing happens outside the field of cause and effect.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Dontaskme wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Dontaskme wrote:
All possibility is but cannot be known entirely in it's wholeness since it is infinite and therefore without beginning or end.

Time or the play of duality is what stops everything (all possibility) from happening at once.

There is infinite timeless knowing of everything; but no knower; since a knower implies two, and this timeless knowing one cannot step into the same river not even once.

There is no such thing known as ever. Ever just is...with out ever knowing it is.

This one has never known death(nothingness) therefore, can never know life (everything)

Life in this context is compared to a dream.
This is a litany of confusion between cause and effect.
There is nothing to be known outside the field of cause and effect, since nothing happens outside the field of cause and effect.
And yet you come out with a ridiculous statement like this; "Time or the play of duality is what stops everything (all possibility) from happening at once. .... As if "Duality" were a cause.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness - ever

Post by Greta »

Dontaskme wrote:
Greta wrote:I'm very simple. As far as I'm concerned there appears to have always been something - that's where the only evidence lies so far.

Still, as far as I can remember, there was nothingness before my earliest memory of sitting in a pram scribbling on a wall by the front door. Before then is a blank which is, I suppose, a kind of nothingness.
Nothingness is still a knowing.

Do you see the dilemma ...

... What's an idea?

All things known are an idea.

That which is not known can never be an idea.
Dontaskme, you may need to parse more tightly. By the above logic you could also say that that Lovecraft's Cthulu is a knowing because it is an idea.

I do understand your duality angle - nothing/something. I personally see "nothing" as purely relative and limited - "something is all we've even known". A person may have nothing in their bank account, but their account is not "nothing, consisting of a data file with your particulars and the physical servers to handle potential transactions. Mostly, though, nothingness is relative. There is relative nothingness in intergalactic space, yet those voids will still be thinly infused with gravitational waves, EM and the nuclear forces.

I think the deeper notion of nothingness comes from the knowledge that everything dies, so if the universe dies then there'll be "nothing". The view is based on assumptions - that we understand how life and death are related beyond prosaic dynamics, and that the universe is a cosmic fluke, a one-off event.
Post Reply