- #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?
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?