There have been several
discussion threads that tries to deal with "nothingness" and the theistic argument that uses this concept to attempt to prove God's existence. Now by and large i agree with such argurments but it raises some questions: 1. What is ''nothingness''? is it the absense of just physical existence or all existence: including God and the supernatural (Pure Nothingness) 2. Did time emerged from non-time? Did non-time requires a complete absence of physical existence? 3. Can we assume that there might be a state of affairs that consists of a complete absence of all existence?

By "existence" I am referring to
everything that actually exists: the
natural, the supernatural, the
ultranatural, the super-duper natural.. - without exception. If it is actualized, then it is part of existence.

Ask and ye shall find.
I choose to live for the here and now.
Can't be bothered with the 'what ifs'!
Not that curious.
Reason? It does not change a thing. . .for better or for worse.

mkmyers45: 1. What is ''nothingness''? is it the absense of just physical existence or all existence: including God and the supernatural (Pure Nothingness)

Nothingness, as the word infers, refers to nothing at all. This means that nothingness does not exist: it is nothing.

2. Did time emerged from non-time?

Following from the premise that nothingess does not exist, then there can be no such thing as non-time.

Time as such, is thus permanent and self-existent.

3. Can we assume that there might be a state of affairs that consists of a complete absence of all existence?

No: for two reasons.

Firstly, nothingness by definition is nothing - it does not exist.

Secondly, given that -

[x] There is "somethingness", as we perceive

[y] "Somethingness" cannot derive from nothingness - which does not exist

- - -> Then there is only ever "somethingness," and never nothingness.

That permanent somethingness, is what is defined as GOD.

Deep Sight:

Nothingness, as the word infers, refers to nothing at all. This means that nothingness does not exist: it is nothing.



Following from the premise that nothingess does not exist, then there can be no such thing as non-time.

Time as such, is thus permanent and self-existent.



No: for two reasons.

Firstly, nothingness by definition is nothing - it does not exist.

Secondly, given that -

[x] There is "somethingness", as we perceive

[y] "Somethingness" cannot derive from nothingness - which does not exist

- - -> Then there is only ever "somethingness," and never nothingness.

[i]That[/i] permanent somethingness, is what is defined as GOD.

You are now sounding like a pantheist.
Now, if permanent somethingness is what is defined as god,then the following should be true:

1. Permanent somethingness is what we refer to to as existence.
2. That permanent somethingness is eternal, therefore there would have been no time when god created something.
3. God does not exist, since god, as your definition implies, should be indistinguishable from the permanent somethingness which we call existence.
4. Permanent somethingness nullifies the notion of something being created.

1. Certain events spring up from nothing as we know and defy energy equations e.g Virtual Particle behaviors on Sub-Atomic Level

2. Don't we have a Duality complex when you propose Permanent Somethingness (Pure) but you reject a state of not-being that even encompasses the supernatural?

3. Isn't it logical to assume the absolute to the a synthesis of Something and Nothing to be the becoming? 4. I ask again: Can we assume that there might have been a state of affairs that was a pure vacuum?

Edit:modified

this looks like the beginnings of a very funny thread....

Question:Please define nothing and give two examples.
Answer: Define what?

plaetton: [/b]

You are now sounding like a pantheist.
Now, if permanent somethingness is what is defined as god,then the following should be true:

1. Permanent somethingness is what we refer to to as existence.

It is what we refer to as the eternal primordial somethingness.

2. That permanent somethingness is eternal, therefore there would have been no time when god created something.

3. God does not exist, since god, as your definition implies, should be indistinguishable from the permanent somethingness which we call existence.
4. Permanent somethingness nullifies the notion of something being created.

No: because you are referring to the permanent somethingness - which could not be matter because matter is mutable and tangible and hence not self existent, as to be referred to as the permanent somethingness.

As such, matter is a result of the permanent somethingness and is thus caused.

Mr_Anony: this looks like the beginnings of a very funny thread....

Question:Please define nothing and give two examples.
Answer: Define what?

Define is relative to nothing i hope you know that..

mkmyers45: Sorry Im Mobile: 1. Certain events spring up from nothing as we know and defy energy equations e.g Virtual Particle behaviours on Sub-Atomic Level

No: please do not be mis-educated by psuedo scientific enthusiasts ignorant of every canon or fibre of science.

Virstual particles DO NOT EMERGE FROM NOTHINGNESS. The quantum vacuums referred to are NOT nothing as there is no perfect vacuum ever observed and these vacuums do contain gaseuous pressure.

2. Don't we have a Duality complex when you propose Permanent (Pure) but you reject a state of not-bieng that even encompasses the supernatural.

Please see my last revert to you. I gave two explicit reasons why there is no such thing as nothingness. Address them.

You might also wish to take up Anony's challenge to cite an example of nothingness. As I told you, quantum vaccums are not nothingness.

3. Isn't it logical to assume the absolute to the a synthesis of Something and Nothing to be the becoming?

No, because by definition, nothingness is nothing and as such cannot exist.

4. I ask again: Can we assume that there might have been a state of affairs that was a pure vaccum?

Where is the pure vacuum please. Can you show me an example?

So please note that as somethingness cannot emerge from nothingness, [0 + 0 = 0] then since there is somethingness, it could not derive from that which does not exist.

mkmyers45: Define is relative to nothing i hope you know that..

What??

No: please do not be mis-educated
by psuedo scientific enthusiasts
ignorant of every canon or fibre of
science. Virstual particles DO NOT EMERGE
FROM NOTHINGNESS. The quantum
vacuums referred to are NOT
nothing as there is no perfect
vacuum ever observed and these
vacuums do contain gaseuous pressure.

Where do these particles emerge from? Thier energy levels greatly flunctuate as the initial and final energy level differ..I myself have not personally observed this phenomena its important to know that the behaviours defies physics..If you disagree, How do you explain thier pop-in/pop-out phase?

No, because by definition,
nothingness is nothing and as such
cannot exist.

What is the total absense of bieng? Remember im postulating nothing/not-bieng as an idea

Deep Sight:

It is what we refer to as the eternal primordial somethingness.



No: because you are referring to the permanent somethingness - which could not be matter because matter is mutable and tangible and hence not self existent, as to be referred to as the permanent somethingness.

As such, matter is a result of the permanent somethingness and is thus caused.

What is matter made of , if not the primordial somethingness?
So matter is either something or matter is nothing. We know that matter is something, therefore something is the raw material for matter.
Mater being entirely made of something, is therefore part and parcel of the permanent somethiness that you speak about. not so?
If matter is mutable and tangible, then so is the permanent somethingness which you define as god.

For ,if the permanent somethingess was immutable and intangible, there is no logical way it would have the flexibility to create,beget or morph into a mutable and tangible something.

Where is the pure vacuum please.
Can you show me an example? So please note that as
somethingness cannot emerge
from nothingness, [0 + 0 = 0] then
since there is somethingness, it
could not derive from that which
does not exist.

The conditions of a pure vaccum may never be re-attainable...Its not illogical to rubbish that such a state once existed that is why i used the word 'might'..Infact majority of the very little pre-bing bang postulations point to it..and the conditions for a pure vaccum may be overcome in the future

Mr_Anony: this looks like the beginnings of a very funny thread....

Question:Please define nothing and give two examples.
Answer: Define what?

Can be defined as a state of affair where nothing is in existence..eg A Perfect Vaccum

mkmyers45: There have been several
discussion threads that tries to deal with "nothingness" and the theistic argument that uses this concept to attempt to prove God's existence. Now by and large i agree with such argurments but it raises some questions: 1. What is ''nothingness''? is it the absense of just physical existence or all existence: including God and the supernatural (Pure Nothingness) 2. Did time emerged from non-time? Did non-time requires a complete absence of physical existence? 3. Can we assume that there might be a state of affairs that consists of a complete absence of all existence?

MKMYER45 I SEE YOU HAVE BEEN SMOKING THAT SKUNK AGAIN

Primodial "somethingness" is probably the simplest substance and building blocks of existence. Probably matter or energy.

In my belief, the answer for why there is something rather than nothing doesn't necessitate God's existence.

Kay 17: Primodial "somethingness" is probably the simplest substance and building blocks of existence. Probably matter or energy.

Abi o?

obadiah777: MKMYER45 I SEE YOU HAVE BEEN SMOKING THAT SKUNK AGAIN

Field marshal buzugee..its just holy shekpe

Where is the pure vacuum please.
Can you show me an example? So please note that as somethingness cannot emerge from nothingness, [0 + 0 = 0] then
since there is somethingness, it could not derive from that which does not exist.

Conditions for a pure vacuum:

1. Maintaining a temperature of 0Kelvin [absolute zero]..now its important to know that science has never reached but they have successfully cooled stuff to a few hundreds of a billionth of a degree...Now the lowest temperature ever
measured in the solar system was on the Moon. Last year, NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter measured temperatures as low as −240°C in permanently shadowed craters near the lunar south pole. The coldest known place in the universe is the Boomerang Nebula, 5,000 light years away from us in the constellation Centaurus. Scientists reported in 1997 that gases blowing out from a central dying star have
expanded and rapidly cooled to 1 kelvin, only one degree warmer than absolute zero. Usually, gas clouds in space have been warmed to at least 2.7 kelvin by the cosmic microwave background, the relic radiation left over from the big bang. But the Boomerang Nebula's expansion creates a kind of cosmic refrigerator, allowing the gases to maintain their unusual cool. Now i insist that it is logical to assume that a certain point in time 0K was obtainable within space [container] for a period of time.

Now at 0Kelvin we have absolutely nothing[perfect vacuum]...because even photon radiation is no longer possible by the container. Although external weakly interacting particle may breach the container eventually no matter how thick the container is, it is safe to assume that even for a billionth of a nano second we have nothing.