Office conversation [Archive] - SV650.org - SV650 & Gladius 650 Forum

Baph

22-05-07, 11:23 AM

I really should get a new job. The conversation in the office at the moment went from religion & God creating the universe, to the scientists version of the big bang. Then the religious side commented that there was nothing before God created everything.

Some of you know what the guys in this office are like (and office of computer programmers), so it was inevitable.

What is nothing?

Discuss (or just ignore me :( ).

MiniMatt

22-05-07, 11:25 AM

Easy the universe is turtles all the way down (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down) :)

the_lone_wolf

22-05-07, 11:31 AM

again with the evolution...

www.venganza.org (http://www.venganza.org)

;)

Baph

22-05-07, 11:33 AM

You're both slightly missing the point.

What is nothing? (The question is the same regardless of faith)

DanDare

22-05-07, 11:36 AM

the_lone_wolf

22-05-07, 11:36 AM

You're both slightly missing the point.

What is nothing?
"Nothing is an album by Swedish tech metal band Meshuggah" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_(album))

:rolleyes:

DanDare

22-05-07, 11:36 AM

You're both slightly missing the point.

What is nothing? (The question is the same regardless of faith)

See above

keithd

22-05-07, 11:36 AM

nothing is something multiplied by nothing

thats what mr chapman my maths teacher told me

he didnt say "fact" after, but i feel he would have had right on his side if he chose to.

Alpinestarhero

22-05-07, 11:37 AM

Baph

22-05-07, 11:37 AM

"Nothing is an album by Swedish tech metal band Meshuggah" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_(album))

:rolleyes:

But isn't that a music album, and therefore something?

Dan, you posted a period, again, something.

Alpinestarhero... come on, you're a chemist. Define the terms you used without using the term you're trying to define.

the_lone_wolf

22-05-07, 11:39 AM

how about this?

Baph

22-05-07, 11:40 AM

how about this?
Nope, must try harder :p

MiniMatt

22-05-07, 11:43 AM

I suspect "nothing" is a concept that's pretty much impossible to squeeze into a human mind, much like infinity - they're both something we can intellectually appreciate but not actually comprehend as such.

Closest approximation I can come up with is - it's exactly the same as your perception of the universe before you were born (excepting the people who apparently remember being Julius Caesar in a previous life). What is death - exactly the same as before you were born, ie. nothing. Curiously my internal concept of nothing is black, and surely black is something, if only a concept?

northwind

22-05-07, 11:43 AM

"Nothing, nothing's what you got when you ain't got something."

Alpinestarhero

22-05-07, 11:44 AM

Alpinestarhero... come on, you're a chemist. Define the terms you used without using the term you're trying to define.

Ah damn, you really want an answer!

Well, I guess in truth, there really is no such thing as nothing. Something must have been before, possible a rather small and infinetly dense blip of energy. Quantum fluctuations (random, of course!) caused an inhomogenity in the energy blip which caused its "explosion" and therefore the period of great expansion, during which matter (and antimetter) where created (an anhilated). We only say theres nothing when our instruments cant detect something (limits of detection) and we only say theres nothing before the universe because it probably isnt something we can comprehend, sorta like we couldnt imagine a shape with dimensions higher than our common three (unless your very very strange)

That better?

Matt

Baph

22-05-07, 11:46 AM

I suspect "nothing" is a concept that's pretty much impossible to squeeze into a human mind, much like infinity - they're both something we can intellectually appreciate but not actually comprehend as such.

At that point, I'd say you hit the nail on the head. If I wanted to be pedantic, a concept is something. :rolleyes:

Northy, if you've "got anything" then you have something, not nothing.

You can actually get away with "Nothing can't be defined." Which is actually a double negative in English, and implies that everything can be defined. Which brings back the original question.

You can tell why we're all computer programmers in this office.

SoulKiss

22-05-07, 11:46 AM

Nothing is something and that something is nothing.

Or, its cosmic noodles, put in place by the flying spagetti monster. These intertwined and formed the matter you and I know and love today.

All hail the flying spagetti monster and the pastafarians who worship it (not he, or she!)

Matt

BTW Stingo - you are not allowed to go out on your bike anymore.

Studies have shown that Global Warming is due to the decline in the number of Pirates in the world.

You have a bad off and its goodbye Essex !!!!!!

the_lone_wolf

22-05-07, 11:47 AM

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/4910/nothingxu4.gif

the_lone_wolf

22-05-07, 11:47 AM

Nope, must try harder :p
see above ^^^

:p

Alpinestarhero

22-05-07, 11:48 AM

BTW Stingo - you are not allowed to go out on your bike anymore.

Studies have shown that Global Warming is due to the decline in the number of Pirates in the world.

You have a bad off and its goodbye Essex !!!!!!

Does that pirates only include the sea-faring kind? What about those that pirate DVD's and games, and CD's and stuff?

Y'arr!

Matt

Baph

22-05-07, 11:48 AM

Ah damn, you really want an answer!

Well, I guess in truth, there really is no such thing as nothing. Something must have been before, possible a rather small and infinetly dense blip of energy. Quantum fluctuations (random, of course!) caused an inhomogenity in the energy blip which caused its "explosion" and therefore the period of great expansion, during which matter (and antimetter) where created (an anhilated). We only say theres nothing when our instruments cant detect something (limits of detection) and we only say theres nothing before the universe because it probably isnt something we can comprehend, sorta like we couldnt imagine a shape with dimensions higher than our common three (unless your very very strange)

That better?

Matt

Trying much too hard :p See above.

I also like using the "So if God created everything, that implies that everything has a cause, because God caused it to happen. So what caused God to come into existence? Surely if there is a non-divine cause for God existing, perhaps, everything else wasn't by divine intervention?"

But that's mainly to wind people up, and a pre-cursor to the "what is nothing?" question.

Grinch

22-05-07, 11:50 AM

What is nothing?

Discuss (or just ignore me :( ).

That space inbetween Scoobs ears...

Next.

Alpinestarhero

22-05-07, 11:54 AM

Trying much too hard :p See above.

I also like using the "So if God created everything, that implies that everything has a cause, because God caused it to happen. So what caused God to come into existence? Surely if there is a non-divine cause for God existing, perhaps, everything else wasn't by divine intervention?"

But that's mainly to wind people up, and a pre-cursor to the "what is nothing?" question.

Your like my lecturers! Not enough detail, or too much!!!!

I'm sticking with the noodles theory. Why else would chinese food and pasta meals taste so good if they where not the food of god :cool:

I do agree, the failing of god is "where did he come from"? On holiday from a paralell universe, decided that "hey, its alright here! I'll start my own little universe!"

Of course, we could all be living in a computer-genarated world ourself, hence thats how we got here. We could just be code

Ok, maybe not

Matt

Baph

22-05-07, 11:58 AM

Of course, we could all be living in a computer-genarated world ourself, hence thats how we got here. We could just be code

Ok, maybe not

Matt

If we are, I'mma start hacking. If the entire environment around us is code, I'm sure it'll have a flaw somewhere that allows arbitary execution...

SoulKiss

22-05-07, 12:13 PM

Ah damn, you really want an answer!

Well, I guess in truth, there really is no such thing as nothing. Something must have been before, possible a rather small and infinetly dense blip of energy. Quantum fluctuations (random, of course!) caused an inhomogenity in the energy blip which caused its "explosion" and therefore the period of great expansion, during which matter (and antimetter) where created (an anhilated). We only say theres nothing when our instruments cant detect something (limits of detection) and we only say theres nothing before the universe because it probably isnt something we can comprehend, sorta like we couldnt imagine a shape with dimensions higher than our common three (unless your very very strange)

That better?

Matt

Hey Matt - you can answer your own "Where does god come from" question with your previous post.

"God" was the "rather small and infinetly dense blip of energy".

When he died/exploded, he created the universe.

Therefore, God died to create us, and we are all part of God.

Wow - I could make a religion of this..................

Warthog

22-05-07, 12:31 PM

I think you'll find I answered your question perfectly well on the first page...

... you just couldn't see it of course :)

MeridiaNx

22-05-07, 12:34 PM

`Tis a strange place, this Limbo !--not a Place,
Yet name it so ;--where Time & weary Space
Fettered from flight, with night-mair sense of fleeing,
Strive for their last crepuscular half-being ;--
Lank Space, and scytheless Time with branny hands
Barren and soundless as the measuring sands,
Not mark`d by flit of Shades,--unmeaning they
As Moonlight on the dial of the day !
But that is lovely--looks like Human Time,--
An Old Man with a steady Look sublime,
That stops his earthly Task to watch the skies ;
But he is blind--a Statue hath such Eyes ;--
Yet having moon-ward turn`d his face by chance,
Gazes the orb with moon-like countenance,
With scant white hairs, with foretop bald & high,
He gazes still,--his eyeless Face all Eye ;--
As `twere an organ full of silent Sight,
His whole Face seemeth to rejoice in Light !
Lip touching lip, all moveless, bust and limb,
He seems to gaze at that which seems to gaze on him !
No such sweet sights doth Limbo Den immure,
Wall`d round, and made a Spirit-jail secure,
By the mere Horror of blank Naught-at-all,
Whose circumambience doth these Ghosts enthral.
A lurid thought is growthless, dull Privation,
Yet that is but a Purgatory curse ;
Hell knows a fear far worse,
A fear--a future fate.--`Tis positive Negation !

Closing half of 'Limbo' by Coleridge. As a philosophical poet he uses the Christian idea of Limbo as a departure for a discussion of the nature of 'nothingness', as well as of existentialism with regards to the old man.

Pay particular attention to the closing line: 'positive negation'.

This would be the view that makes a differentiation between two different states as illustrated by the following sentence:

'There is nothing in the larder.'

1. There is no meat, cheese, bread etc. etc.
2. There is an active nothingness, a state which defines the positive presence of something in contrast, in other words by being the exact opposite. It is not merely an absence of 'positive' things.

Bit of a mental tongue-twister, hope this provides something to the discussion :D

MeridiaNx

22-05-07, 12:35 PM

Hey Matt - you can answer your own "Where does god come from" question with your previous post.

"God" was the "rather small and infinetly dense blip of energy".

When he died/exploded, he created the universe.

Therefore, God died to create us, and we are all part of God.

Wow - I could make a religion of this..................

Rather close to Kabbalistic belief there, look it up and you'll find something similar (if a little bit nutty).

22-05-07, 12:44 PM

Ping

22-05-07, 12:50 PM

Nothing is also very subjective... Before I had lunch I had nothing but what was naturally supposed to be in my stomach... So to my mind, nothing of value. Therefore, I had nothing in my stomach.

Who's to say that total nothingness to us, isn't actually 'something' to some other being not at all like us?....

:smt045

TVR_Tracy

22-05-07, 12:51 PM

"Nothing, nothing's what you got when you ain't got something."

"Nothing" by A, great song!

Anyhoo, back to the discussion... This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang) was quite "interesting"... by interesting I mean complex...

How closely we can extrapolate towards the singularity is debated—certainly not earlier than the Planck Epoch. The early hot, dense phase is itself referred to as "the Big Bang",[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang#_note-11) and is considered the "birth" of our universe.......

The earliest phases of the Big Bang are subject to much speculation. In the most common models, the universe was filled homogeneously and isotropically with an incredibly high energy density and concomitantly huge temperatures and pressures, very rapidly expanding and cooling.

Hope that made sense :smt104

Thus, if the Big Bang was extreme temperatures, high energy and pressures, then pre-Big Bang must be lesser temperatures and pressures ;)... Ok, that makes sense to me, BUT what caused the increase in pressures and temps etc? :smt104 Arghhh!

hmm I knew there was a reason I chose biology over quantum mechanics :o

Baph

22-05-07, 12:52 PM

Can you define voltage without using the term 'potential difference' - it's not easy. But if there is no voltage, no potential difference, there is nothing - so 'nothing' is what's happening inside the wires before you switch the juice on.

By that definition, "nothing" is the state of electrons in the wire prior to supplying a voltage. Therefore "nothing" once again, is "something."

By the way, voltage isn't potential anything. It either is or it isn't. It's a mesaure of pressure (you either have it or you don't) under which electricity flows. (Current being a measure of how much is flowing because of the pressure).

Baph

22-05-07, 12:56 PM

Thus, if the Big Bang was extreme temperatures, high energy and pressures, then pre-Big Bang must be lesser temperatures and pressures ;)... Ok, that makes sense to me, BUT what caused the increase in pressures and temps etc? :smt104 Arghhh!

hmm I knew there was a reason I chose biology over quantum mechanics :o

Collision of particles causes interactions that could be described as pressure, or that cause friction and therefore temperature.

Think of radiation (surely you studied that under biology), irradiated particles are warmed by collisions. The higher the frequency of radiation, the shorter it travels (alpha radiation) but more importantly, the more damage caused.

MeridiaNx

22-05-07, 12:58 PM

Thus, if the Big Bang was extreme temperatures, high energy and pressures, then pre-Big Bang must be lesser temperatures and pressures ;)

Sounds a bit like false logic to me...the quotation states the high temperature and pressure with no speculation as to conditions before that. As far as we know 'pre-Big Bang', assuming there to be such a period, temperature and pressure may have been even higher still? Just speculation, and I'm no scientist, but you can't extrapolate from one state and assume the certainty of another without substantiation.

As far as my memory goes, you wouldn't need anyone to 'create' the high temperatures and pressures from a previous state of lower ones, they exist as a by-product of the enormous mass crammed into such a tiny little space.

Baph

22-05-07, 01:03 PM

As far as my memory goes, you wouldn't need anyone to 'create' the high temperatures and pressures from a previous state of lower ones, they exist as a by-product of the enormous mass crammed into such a tiny little space.

Correct. You can stick gas in a canister, and increase the pressure as much as you like. Eventually the canister will break. If that cracking produces sparks, then you'd better be out of the way.

Fire (and therefore explosions) need 3 things:
Heat
Fuel
Oxygen

I find the last one of those interesting in the big bang theory. Oxygen must of existed in space for there to be an "explosion."

MeridiaNx

22-05-07, 01:10 PM

Hehe, all this sciency-talk...I'm guessing that means you want a science-type answer to this? Or are you carefully ignoring the philosophical one I put on the previous page? :)

Coming at it from that angle (seeing as I know bugger all about science), then nothingness doesn't actually exist; it is an active state all of its own, much as white is a combination of all colours rather than an absence of any. So says Coleridge anyway.

Baph

22-05-07, 01:12 PM

Hehe, all this sciency-talk...I'm guessing that means you want a science-type answer to this? Or are you carefully ignoring the philosophical one I put on the previous page? :)

I'm not ignoring anything, I agreed with MiniMatt & said that if I wanted to be pedantic I could still pick faults. As your #2 points out, nothing is a state, therefore, it is something.

Oh yea, and I'm still on the first page ;) (settings allow for 40 posts per page ;) )

Ping

22-05-07, 01:13 PM

I'm not ignoring anything, I agreed with MiniMatt & said that if I wanted to be pedantic I could still pick faults.

Oh yea, and I'm still on the first page ;) (settings allow for 40 posts per page ;) )

*a small squeak can be heard from page 3* LIES!!!!! :lol:

MeridiaNx

22-05-07, 01:14 PM

I find the last one of those interesting in the big bang theory. Oxygen must of existed in space for there to be an "explosion."

That, of course, is assuming that the 'explosion' was similar to those we currently understand...no reason why it couldn't have operated in a different manner though.

I imagine it could work somehow like a giant magnet being turned on, forcing everything apart. Or it always was on, but the forces keeping the mass in such a small space were suddenly removed. Can't quite remember how magnetic forces interact with gravity/mass/energy etc. but I'm sure there's a link somewhere...

Baph

22-05-07, 01:15 PM

*a small squeak can be heard from page 3* LIES!!!!! :lol:

Page 3? Like the one in The Sun? :confused:

I opened the discussion, does that mean I have to reply to everything in the thread, or be accused of ignoring things? :p

Ping

22-05-07, 01:15 PM

Actually, everyone's ignoring the Pingster today so no biggy. :rolleyes:

;)

Edit: Its in the rules, you must always reply to Ping... :lol:

Baph

22-05-07, 01:16 PM

That, of course, is assuming that the 'explosion' was similar to those we currently understand...no reason why it couldn't have operated in a different manner though.

I imagine it could work somehow like a giant magnet being turned on, forcing everything apart. Or it always was on, but the forces keeping the mass in such a small space were suddenly removed. Can't quite remember how magnetic forces interact with gravity/mass/energy etc. but I'm sure there's a link somewhere...

Hence the quote marks ;)

Gravity is in effect an objects magnetisim to another object. The strength of pull being defined by mass, and their relative energy to each other (momentum, even heat plays a part in gravity/magnetisim).

Baph

22-05-07, 01:17 PM

Actually, everyone's ignoring the Pingster today so no biggy. :rolleyes:

;)

Edit: Its in the rules, you must always reply to Ping... :lol:

Sorry ma'am. :oops:

MiniMatt

22-05-07, 01:17 PM

Actually, everyone's ignoring the Pingster today so no biggy. :rolleyes:

;)

Edit: Its in the rules, you must always reply to Ping... :lol:

/Waves at Ping :)

This whole thread started making my head hurt around page three, time to derail into something easier :)

MeridiaNx

22-05-07, 01:19 PM

I'm not ignoring anything, I agreed with MiniMatt & said that if I wanted to be pedantic I could still pick faults. As your #2 points out, nothing is a state, therefore, it is something.

Oh yea, and I'm still on the first page ;) (settings allow for 40 posts per page ;) )

Aha true, hadn't thought of different page settings. And it wasn't a dig, just checking it hadn't been missed in favour of the more technical responses ;)

And yes, my 2nd point does suggest that a positive negation model suggests that 'nothing' is 'something' but that, to an extent, would be the end of the discussion as it disproves the underlying concept in your original question. If we accept that model to be true then our lay, everyday understanding of 'nothing' is in fact misguided and the concept does not really exist at all. Hence it could *never* be proved.

So going down that route does provide *an* answer, though of course if you/we/I don't accept that view then there is more to say :D

Baph

22-05-07, 01:26 PM

So going down that route does provide *an* answer, though of course if you/we/I don't accept that view then there is more to say :D

At which point I would argue that in the search for knowledge, surely we must attempt to find the "correct" answer. Usually by listing possible answers & ruling them out to do as Sherlock Holmes said ;)

Merely "an answer" isn't sufficient :)

MeridiaNx

22-05-07, 01:36 PM

Merely "an answer" isn't sufficient :)

True, though if you believe its line of reasoning then it *is* the correct answer.

Though of course this is approaching the matter from two completely different angles; one being a semantic discussion of meaning and understanding, linguistic and philosophical; the other being concrete and measurable, a scientific answer.

Never the twain shall meet (or not for another few hundred years perhaps!)