# What Is Nothing? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 25, 2015, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420 "2015-06-25T03:47:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/21 "2015-06-25T15:04:23Z")
> [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](#): > > :dubious: I was oversimplifying, but in current theories there are elemental particles. You can’t think of them as tiny, solid balls of matter. They’re really energy, charges and fields acting in complicated ways that give us the “illusion” of what we think of as solid matter. You can’t divide these “particles” down any further. It’s where the buck stops with the fabric of reality. ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/22 "2015-06-25T15:12:06Z")
The idea of absolute nothingness, of the sort of the age-old question, “why does something exist instead of nothing?” is almost purely in the realm of philosophy. Is it meaningful to think there was absolutely nothing before our universe (including the laws of physics, matter, energy, space and time itself) exploded into existence? Was there, or is there, something else before the Big Bang? And before that? Etc. Does the fact that something exists mean absolute nothingness is impossible or unstable? If so, must the universe be infinite in size, since nothingness can’t exist? And so on. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/23 "2015-06-25T16:01:04Z")
Quantum mechanics does not allow for nothingness, to put it crudely. The uncertainly principle tells us that certain pairs of properties, most famously position and momentum, cannot be simultaneously measured to infinite precision. One has to get fuzzier. Energy and time are another conjugate pair. This has the result that the vacuum is not a vacuum. Particles can emerge if they last for a sufficient short a period of time. This is known as virtual particles or the quantum foam. We can see the reality of this effect at the event horizons of black holes. One of the pair of particles can break away, causing the black hole to slowly evaporate as [Hawking radiation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Overview). Therefore, even without an answer as to what “space” or space-time" actually “is” we can say that it is filled with virtual particles everywhere at all times. Some have postulated an unusual blip in the quantum foam is the cause of the universe itself. However the science works out, it finishes the concept of nothingness. Nothing/something is a binary duality that can’t exist in quantum mechanics. Only fuzziness can. Fuzziness is always something. There is never nothing. There never was nothing. There never can be nothing. The size of particles is irrelevant, too. That’s old-fashioned thinking. The tiresome endless arguments of 19th century philosophy can be put aside for newer and different tiresome endless arguments in 21st century mode. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/24 "2015-06-25T17:12:49Z")
[Here is a nearly 2 hour discussion by physicists of what “nothing” is.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OLz6uUuMp8) Turns out there are a number of definitions. The panel includes Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Lawrence Krause, so it’s at least entertaining whether or not it answers the OP’s questions. ---
**Author:** ![Asympotically\_fat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47c2d/32.png) [@Asympotically\_fat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asympotically_fat)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/25 "2015-06-25T19:21:59Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > I kind of like gauge theory, because I kind of understand it. Since we observe fields, there has to be something to serve as a medium for them. Gauge theory (AAUI) models a very fine 3D lattice of charge/force carrying something-or-the-other. When a single frame in the lattice is not symmetrical, meaning you cannot trace around it and come up with the same state, there is something there. So basically, all matter and energy consists of little asymmetric twists in the gauge lattice of spacetime. > > And the twists are small and far between: you yourself are [a whisper away from being absolutely nothing](http://www.peterrussell.com/Reality/RHTML/R21.php). > > Well, nothing in the sense that you mean it. Actual nothing in the most literal sense cannot be measured or observed because it has no dimensions. A gauge theory is really just a field theory with symmetries that represent redundancies in the field description vs the physical situations it describes. For example classical electromagnetism is an example of a gauge theory as electromagnetic fields that are distinct in a mathematical sense can represent the same physical situations. In most physical theories analytic solutions are known only for a handful of situations and in some advanced physical theories the easiest known method of obtaining approximate numerical solutions is to approximate continuous spacetime as a discrete lattice. A lattice gauge theory is a gauge theory on the spacetime lattice that approximates continuous spacetime. So really gauge theories and lattices and hence lattice gauge theories are just ways of understanding physical theories. ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/26 "2015-06-25T20:26:09Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > “Nothing” can’t exist at all, if existence is a property of things. “Nothing” doesn’t exist in the same way that “no-one” and “nowhere” don’t exist. Beg to differ: I’ve been to the middle of nowhere. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/27 "2015-06-25T20:31:25Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > Beg to differ: I’ve been to the middle of nowhere. I thought, like the universe, that nowhere doesn’t have a center. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/28 "2015-06-25T21:05:10Z")
> [@Isilder](#): > > No… Or if it there was, its undetectable so may as well be nothing. > > Not even photons are waves in something (electric and magnetic fields don’t need to be in anything, apparently…the numbers suggest it … the properties of various substances and the empty space are consistent… in that the empty space measures up as empty space… in terms of electric and magnetic properties) “Empty space” and “waves in nothing” aren’t accurate, in my opinion. [Fields](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_%28physics%29) are real, man. That Faraday guy was onto something. Waves _are_ oscillating fields. Fields exist _in_ space. There is no such thing as “empty” space. It’s full of fields. So to the OP, particles exist in space. Fields exist in space. There is no such thing as empty space. Whether “nothing” exists depends on your definition and/or religion. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/29 "2015-06-25T21:06:11Z")
Let a black hole suck out the contents of a box, the close it tightly and mail it off to the I.R.S. When they return it to you, it will contain _nothing_. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/30 "2015-06-25T21:23:56Z")
In my completely useless opinion, it’s highly unlikely that it’s particles all the way down. What “particles” do is let us quantify behavior of the quantum world. That does not mean there is “space” between the tiniest particles and it does not mean the particles themselves are discrete from whatever “space” is. And “space” is not nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/31 "2015-06-26T01:02:49Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > I was oversimplifying. . . . Well, maybe, but I was making [an obscure board reference](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=406088), starting at Post #7. But there’s a [missing graphic](https://www.google.com/search?q=spock+raised+eyebrow&safe=strict&biw=953&bih=682&noj=1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=faSMVZa7O8LsgwSQt4PgDA&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ) in that thread. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/32 "2015-06-26T01:45:09Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > Beg to differ: I’ve been to the middle of nowhere. Did you get there on horseback? If so, did the horse have a name? ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/33 "2015-06-26T01:51:40Z")
> [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](#): > > Well, maybe, but I was making [an obscure board reference](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=406088), starting at Post #7. But there’s a [missing graphic](https://www.google.com/search?q=spock+raised+eyebrow&safe=strict&biw=953&bih=682&noj=1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=faSMVZa7O8LsgwSQt4PgDA&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ) in that thread. Ahh, I see. Forgive me or taking your human emoticon literally. Your humor is… Logical. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/34 "2015-06-26T03:03:48Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > I thought, like the universe, that nowhere doesn’t have a center. It does, and its name is. . .FRESNO. ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/35 "2015-06-26T04:32:47Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > [Here is a nearly 2 hour discussion by physicists of what “nothing” is.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OLz6uUuMp8) Turns out there are a number of definitions. The panel includes Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Lawrence Krause, so it’s at least entertaining whether or not it answers the OP’s questions. Thanks for this. A very entertaining panel and discussion on Nothingness. I’ve read a third of Krause’s book, but after watching this debate, it inspires me to pick it up again. ---
**Author:** ![jakesteele](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ed8c4c/32.png) [@jakesteele](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jakesteele)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/36 "2015-06-26T05:50:54Z")
> [@mrclose](#): > > Scientist once believed that atoms were the smallest part of matter … until they found that they really weren’t. > > Science has since broken matter down to other, smaller particles like protons, neutrons and electrons. > > Then there are these things called ‘quarks’ and ‘charms’ just to name a few! > > My question: All of these ‘particles’ are **in something** … aren’t they? > > What happens when the breakdown of particles reaches the very end? > > They must exist … somewhere, in something like space? > Like the planets and stars which exist in space, doesn’t mater, no matter (play on words ;)) how small have to exist in a space of some kind? > > Is there really such a thing as **nothing** or will we forever be discovering smaller and smaller particles?😕 > > I know that this question probably cannot be answered but I find it fun to ponder!😃 I was just reading about this a few days ago. Hope it helps. > **[Is the Universe Bubbly? Searching in Space for Quantum Foam](https://www.space.com/29629-quantum-foam-bubbly-universe-search.html)** > > An incredibly small and fantastically strange theoretical feature of the universe is too microscopic to see directly, so a team of scientists has instead looked for it by studying some of the brightest galaxies in the universe. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/37 "2015-06-26T06:05:42Z")
Einstein and Mach had differing opinions on this. One of the two (I do not recall which) felt that even empty space had meaningful “extent” of its own. You could talk about five cubic meters of perfect emptiness. The other argued that only the existence of matter made space meaningful, and you couldn’t talk about five cubic meters of perfect emptiness. One believed that, in a cosmos consisting of only one planet, you could speak of the planet’s rotation, as it was rotating relative to an “absolute true east” of some sort. The other said no, the planet could not rotate, because there weren’t any other bodies – no stars, galaxies, whatnot – for it to rotate with relationship to. I don’t know which view is held today, and I wish I could remember which of the two men held which view. ---
**Author:** ![tattman40](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/db5fbb/32.png) [@tattman40](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tattman40)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/38 "2015-06-26T11:27:00Z")
I’ll take “whats in my wallet” for $100,Alex. I’ll show myself out. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/39 "2015-06-26T17:33:19Z")
For an excellent book on the subject, “The Fabric of the Cosmos” by Brian Greene, author of “The Elegant Universe.” Hopefully it’s not too out-of-date by now. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2015, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420/40 "2015-06-26T17:41:00Z")
> [@mrclose](#): > > I ‘stole’ this from … somewhere?😕 > > Nothing either exists or it does not. > If it exists, it has the property of Existence, it is then something. > If it does not exist, well… it is only then that it is really nothing.😃 I know you’re just kidding, but for anyone who doesn’t know: You can’t use existence as a property when using logic. If you do, you can prove that anything exists. The special nature of existence is one of the fundamental things that distinguishes modern logic (e.g., predicate calculus) from Aristotelian syllogisms. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-nothing/723420.md?page=3)