What Is. Nothingness
When nothing is still a dimension of some kind.
I know nobody knows. But i thought i would ask.
I know nobody knows. But i thought i would ask.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ElRengo · 70-79, M
It deppends on what means "nothing".
If about the Universe as researched by Science, our view of it began to change with the Einstenian Relativity.
The old philosophical / "common sense" concept of space as an empty geometrical container of stuff (or else supposed to be "nothingness") felt by then.
If about the Universe as researched by Science, our view of it began to change with the Einstenian Relativity.
The old philosophical / "common sense" concept of space as an empty geometrical container of stuff (or else supposed to be "nothingness") felt by then.
ElRengo · 70-79, M
@sree251
"It is defined by the three dimensions of length, breadth, and depth."
The above is true for what once was classical mechanics (Newtonian) and inherited from an evenp older pre scientific conception of the World.
Can stood even today as valid for a very local scope and as only a pragmatic resource but it no more describe the Nature of Space.
Since the Michelson-Morley experiments (1880-1881 / 1887) we know that that conception had some kind of failed assumption.
No more "definitive" at all as you can see ("definitive" is not an adjective that scientist use frequently).
The later development of Relativity explained why and gave a better causal description of the World.
A one that also gave a better understanding of the nature of Space itself (no more an empty Euclidean container)
So and since then, what is "a nonsensical statement" more in line with armchair philosophy that with Science is the one attributing to Newtonian Mechanics all what is needed to say about Space.
"It is defined by the three dimensions of length, breadth, and depth."
The above is true for what once was classical mechanics (Newtonian) and inherited from an evenp older pre scientific conception of the World.
Can stood even today as valid for a very local scope and as only a pragmatic resource but it no more describe the Nature of Space.
Since the Michelson-Morley experiments (1880-1881 / 1887) we know that that conception had some kind of failed assumption.
No more "definitive" at all as you can see ("definitive" is not an adjective that scientist use frequently).
The later development of Relativity explained why and gave a better causal description of the World.
A one that also gave a better understanding of the nature of Space itself (no more an empty Euclidean container)
So and since then, what is "a nonsensical statement" more in line with armchair philosophy that with Science is the one attributing to Newtonian Mechanics all what is needed to say about Space.