The closest thing we have to "nothingness" are supervoids in space  regions containing about 1 hydrogen atom per cubic meter. Some of these supervoids are sufficiently massive as to be billions of light years in diameter.
In fact, one of the largest known supervoids could be an indication of an alternate universe.
User Tag List

03162010, 09:11 AM #11

03162010, 09:54 AM #12

03162010, 09:57 AM #13

03162010, 10:01 AM #14

03162010, 10:02 AM #15

03162010, 10:17 AM #16
I think what he means is 0=infinity, there is no difference between the two
The fear of poverty turns people into slaves of money.
"In this Caesar there are many Mariuses"~Sulla
Conquer your inner demons first before you conquer the world.

03162010, 11:15 AM #17
yes i was hoping that was clear... but i guess people will have already structured concepts of what they think they are, so making them change their point of view to my way of thinking might be difficult...
the concept of 0 is infinit. just a negative direction
infinite existance(?), and infinite nonexistance (0)... hense positive (?) and negative (0) infinities

03162010, 12:11 PM #18
Alright. But infinity would be an undefined value under normal circumstances, yes? It's been a long time since I've had to math more advanced than a financial calculator.
I don't really buy into the original notion of zero being undefined. Zero is just zero. It's a useful descriptive tool.
Zero times infinity is an interesting idea. By default anything times zero should equal zero, but infinity isn't really a 'thing' so much as a mathematical construct. Probably some interesting proofs floating about..

03162010, 12:23 PM #19
If you're outlining a whole new definition of negative infinity, then go for it. But negative infinity does not mean infinitely small. It just means an infinitely "large" negative number (ie, its absolute/scalar value is infinitely large).
If you are going to outline a whole new definition of negative infinity, then you can't use the formerly accepted mathematical principles that define infinity and how infinity behaves in mathematical statements to validate your theory. If you want to outline a theory based on this new infinity, then I'd suggest sticking more with the conceptual aspects, rather than using math to back up your statements, as none of your statements are proven true for your new definition.
The concept of 0, when applied to matter, is abstract, as the existence of "nothing" is, for all intents and purposes, impossible (note that it is not so abstract when we are talking about quantities of one specific entity, ie, take a container holding one molecule of water, remove [subtract] one molecule of water from the container, and we really do have zero molecules of water remaining [but I digress]).Thus, like the graph of f(x) = 1/x, we can't really reach nothing; we just get within an infinitely small distance from nothing (ie, an infinitely small amount). The fact that you get an infinitely small distance away from zero by subtracting an infinite number of times does not equate to negative infinite (by standard definitions of infinite), as you are subtracting increasingly smaller quantities from the increasingly smaller differences from the previous subtractions.
If you look at the graph of f(x) = 1/x, you'll see that as x approaches zero from the negative (left) side, you have to add positive integers ("an infinite number of times") to get closer to the zero asymptote. Does this mean that zero is also positive infinite? By the logic in your theory (if I'm understanding your strange sense of math/logic correctly), it would, but how can negative infinite and positive infinite both be 0? That just makes no sense.
And by the way, no, your "obvious mistake" was not obvious to me. Your whole post was pretty mathematically jumbled. You said 0/1 = infinity several times, and then you also said 1/0 = infinity several times, so I didn't know which assertion you were actually going with.
And I'd steer clear of using false premises to prove something true. That method is pretty much doomed for failure.

03162010, 03:49 PM #20ReflecTcelfeRGuest
I would also try to limit the use of the word "negative". Technically anything below zero should mean it never existed. Am I wrong? If I am, I apologize.
Similar Threads

RaptorWizard's Complete Collection of Philosophical Productions on God and Everything
By RaptorWizard in forum General PsychologyReplies: 3Last Post: 06222016, 10:31 PM 
The Ultimate Answer to Life, The Universe, and Everything Test
By Phantonym in forum Online Personality TestsReplies: 23Last Post: 03282010, 09:37 PM 
Introverted and extroverted processes, and everything in between
By laughingebony in forum MyersBriggs and Jungian Cognitive FunctionsReplies: 9Last Post: 08262009, 08:10 PM 
[MBTItm] the solution to life, the universe and everything
By entropie in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)Replies: 7Last Post: 09292008, 11:15 PM