Proving that nothing does not exist

  • Thread starter charlie_sheep
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of nothing and its non-existence through a logical demonstration. It also addresses the use of mathematical principles in language. The conclusion is that nothing does not exist and the space is not full of nothing. The demonstration is not a joke, but a logical argument.
  • #1
charlie_sheep
4
0
I applied some mathematical view to the daily language while studying demonstration.

Proving that nothing does not exist

Consider the following hypothesis by definition:

1. (There's nothing) -> (There's the absence of everything)
2. (There's nothing) -> (There's the absence of everything) -> (There's the absence of the absence of everything)¹ -> (There's everything) -> ~(There's the absence of everything)
And consider the following hypothesis by logic:
3. (There's nothing) v ~(There's nothing)²
4. ~[(There's the absence of everything) ^ ~(There's the absence of everything)]³
By 1 and 2, we have:
5. (There's nothing) -> (There's the absence of everything) ^ ~(There's the absence of everything)
By 5 and 3, we have:
6. [(There's the absence of everything) ^ ~(There's the absence of everything)] v ~(There's nothing)
By 6 and 4, we have:
7. ~(There's nothing)
Q.E.D.

¹ - Cause "everything" includes the "absence of everything", since "absence of everything" is something.
² - Law of excluded middle
³ - Law of non-contradiction

As a result, the space is not full of nothing. Cause nothing does not exist.

Is the demonstration right?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Was this a joke? Because all you have is one long play on words.
 
  • #3
No, it's not a joke.

Long play on words you say, so let me take off the words:

Let A and B be propositions.

Proving ~A

Consider the following hypothesis by definition:

1. A -> B
2. A -> ~B
And consider the following hypothesis by logic:
3. (A v ~A)²
4. ~(B ^ ~B)³
By 1 and 2, we have:
5. A -> (B ^ ~B)
By 5 and 3, we have:
6. (B ^ ~B) v ~A
By 6 and 4, we have:
7. ~A
Q.E.D.

² - Law of excluded middle
³ - Law of non-contradiction
 
  • #4
charlie_sheep said:
No, it's not a joke.

Long play on words you say, so let me take off the words:

Let A and B be propositions.

Proving ~A

Consider the following hypothesis by definition:

1. A -> B
2. A -> ~B

From these two lines it follows that B and ~B, giving you a contradiction. Given a contradiction, you can derive any conclusion.
 
  • #5
This does not meet our guidelines.
 

FAQ: Proving that nothing does not exist

What is the concept of proving that nothing does not exist?

The concept of proving that nothing does not exist is based on the philosophical idea that existence is the default state and that the burden of proof lies on those who claim that something does not exist. In other words, in order to prove that nothing exists, one must provide evidence that there is absolutely nothing in a certain space or context.

Is it possible to prove that nothing exists?

In a scientific sense, it is not possible to prove that nothing exists because the very act of observation and measurement creates something. However, in a philosophical sense, it is possible to argue that nothingness exists in certain contexts or that the concept of nothingness itself is an existence.

How do scientists approach the concept of proving that nothing does not exist?

Scientists approach this concept by using empirical evidence and logical reasoning to support or refute claims about the existence of nothingness. They also consider various theoretical frameworks and conduct experiments to gather data that can inform their understanding of the concept.

Can science ever conclusively prove that nothing does not exist?

No, science cannot conclusively prove that nothing does not exist because the scientific method relies on observation and evidence, which inherently creates something. However, through rigorous experimentation and data analysis, science can provide strong evidence for or against the existence of nothingness in certain contexts.

What are some potential implications of proving that nothing does not exist?

If it were possible to definitively prove that nothing does not exist, it could have major implications for our understanding of the universe and our place in it. It could also challenge our current understanding of the laws of physics and the concept of existence itself. However, since it is not possible to prove this concept, these implications remain purely speculative.

Back
Top