If.....

Dark is absence of light

Cold is absence of heat

and

Space is absence of anything

do the 'negative three' actually exist?

I believe that Dark and Cold are tangible things therefore they exist. However, the "absence of anything" seems a little more difficult to grasp.

Relative to each other yes, otherwise, no... that's the simple explanation.

A ball of ice exists and a black hole exists. Therefore they do not need to be relative to anything to have their existence. I just do not understand what the term, “absence of anything” means.

A ball of ice is cold, yes, but it is cold because it has no heat, not because it creates cold, or radiates freezingness. Ice has to be cold, but cold does not have to be ice.

Similarly nothing creates darkness. Nothing radiates darkness.

With light and heat each creates the other.

Re. space, it is the absence of any thing. Any substance, matter, gas, spirit, emotion - any thing. It is space. Yet by conceptualising it it becomes something.

Or does it?

It was not a question of why do they exists, just do they. The ball of ice exists because it has no heat or the ball of ice exists because it is cold. Either way it still exists. Space cannot be absent of any thing. Space is infinite therefore it contains everything.

[img]smile.gif[/img]

I never asked if ice existed, just whether cold itself exists if it is merely absence of heat. As I said, cold is not limited to ice. Ice is not all that is cold. Cold is a situation that allows ice to exist. But nothing makes ice cold except for lack of heat. A fire is not hot because there's a lack of cold. It is combusting, burning, consuming, and creating light and heat. Movement creates heat, friction creates heat. What creates cold? The absence of heat.

Space is by definition, absence of anything. On our planet the space inside a box is not really space, it has air in it. A vacuum is space. Nothing. No thing.

We've called the nothingness - no gas, matter etc between planets "space" but it could quite easily be called "nothing" or "emptyness" and would mean the same thing.

But, by naming it, and conceptualising it, nothing becomes something yes? Or no? ;)

[ 01-05-2003, 03:20 AM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Exactly
also, what exactly ARE solar winds ? cause those travel around in space same as stars, planets, light and radio waves.

If there is nothing at all in 'space', what conducts radio waves ? something does because it takes time for a light or radio wave to travel through space. if nothing conducted them through the space between, say a space shuttle and earth, then the transmission would be instantaneous between the shuttle antenna and the outer-layer of earths atmosphere (if it could travel at all with no conductor). If this were the case (instant relay) then travelling further from earth would not lengthen the transmission delay because the only thing changing is the amount of 'nothing'. But greater distance DOES lengthen transmission delays.

Sorry if that's a mess of ideas. maybe I can simplify. think of any substance as having a transmission delay multiplier. Air has been shown to conduct light faster than, say glass. Ie air lag = 1, glass lag = 2. If space = 0 then no amount of distance will increase the transmission lag becase Nx0 = 0. But since there IS a transmission delay relative to distance in space, then space MUST be some sort of physical medium. ie space is not nothing, it proably just has an infinitely low density

I'm probably wrong, ignore me or correct me as your knowledge allows

EDIT: cold and dark are just relational adjectives

[ 01-05-2003, 03:27 AM: Message edited by: karlosovic ]

Ok, how can space be infinite? Space does not exist does it? It is what we call nothing.

Is nothing infinite?

Is emptyness infinite?

Is void infinite?

You are conceptualising "space" as being the universe itself, yet the universe is something. Suns, light, gas, earth, heat, light, life. Where there is none of this, there is nothing. Space.

Your conceptualising of 'space' as being 'something' is exactly what I'm talking about :D

Take the universe itself. It is said to be expanding. How can that which is infinite expand? Expanding implies a limit. But where the universe stops, there is nothing. No-thing. Space.

Also, you cannot go further than the end of the universe, because you are part of the universe. Wherever you are, so the universe is also. ;) :D

Ice is just an example of something that is cold. The question is, “dose cold exist”. Yes cold exists because ice exists. Just as anything that is cold exists. Something cold dose not need the absence of heat to be cold. A person’s body temperature is fairly warm, however a person can be extremely cold.

By naming something we do not create its existence. We merely name something that already existed.

The fact that the universe expands is what makes it infinite. Expanding dose not imply a limit, it only implies continuation.

You indicate, “ Wherever you are, so the universe is also”. This implies that there is no such thing as nothing. Whether or not we call that nothing “space” or any other such name, it still exists.

Cold and heat are a subjective description of the energy-level of materia. Hot materia has a higher enery-level than cold materia and is emitting more or less photons (I think) of a certain enery.
With dark and light it's similar - it's the presence or absence of photons. And we should keep in mind, that we aren't able to see the whole light spectrum! When we talk of dark, then we are meaning, that there are no photons, that we are able ot see.
Space.... That's a difficult one. If space wouldn't exist, than things would be very .. uhm ... tight. So, yep, space exists definitely!
We are very limited in understanding our world - so defining space=nothing, is only the way WE are able to see/feel/whatever it. IMO that doesn't have to mean, that there IS nothing or that something doesn't really exist.

Well I didn't have a whole lot of SPACE in my spare bedroom this morning, but after a good solid clean out there is now loads of it. For anyone that wants to personally witness the proof of the existance of this amazing space, please come visit me, and bring cider (no Fosters drinkers allowed :D ).

Now that I have space, the opportunities to fill this void in my life are now without number - I probably should take 2 Bex and have a good lie down to think things over ;) .

I thought space was the intellectual term for the male brain. :D LLAO!! Cold is lack of heat. But since humans tend to be lazy we create words for everything. And I have to admit it´s easier to say "It´s cold outside today" than "Ohh there´s a lack of heat outside today". :D The same goes for light and dark I suppose although it´s near impossible to debate that as borvik pointed out. And if you want to debate "space" you need to clarify yourself Yorick. Some in here are talking about space, others about space and now Davros started talking about space! :D If you know what I mean. ;)

LOL there are truly existing INTELLECTUAL terms for our ... brains? Well... uhmmm .... wait... Hey, I'm male! What did you insinuate??? ( ;) )

I personally believe that nothingness is an absence of something and so it does not exist in the material sense. However it does exist in the general sence that it is there. Same with cold and dark. Just because it is an absence of something does not imply that it doesn't exist in some sense.

Also, I think that the universe is just where the matter that was created in the big bang is, and that space is infinite and the universe is expanding in this infinite space.

in the blackness of space between the geatest distance of stars upon which light has not reached there is nothingess, maybe a little debris but aside from that its just a big oxygenless vacuum...

My question is : When was never?

I think that billions of years ago the big bang happened, I don't know why or how but it did, that part could be discussed on a religion topic but before this there was was nothingness and therefore neverness. However it is mindboggling to think of an infinite nothingness.

<font color="lightblue">Cold is the lacking of heat.
There are places that lack heat. Therefore, cold exists.
Dark is the lacking of light. There are places that have no light. Therefore, dark must exist.

If we can experience it, it must exist. For that same reason, imagination must exist.
As for space - is there anywhere that lacks everything ?? No. If it has no matter, it is a vacuum. It doesn`t lack a name. http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/lennon/satounge.gif</font>

[ 01-05-2003, 09:09 AM: Message edited by: LennonCook ]

But what is a year? The rate at which the earth orbits the sun is not constant, and indeed once upon a time it is likely that the earth didn't orbit the sun at all (indeed there was no 'Earth' as we know it at one stage...supposedly). It's hard to judge passage of time without the recognizable 'landmarks' to navigate with.

The problem basically lies in our own language ..
Recently a few language-philosophers have been analyzing our language
( they owed that to their name ).
F.e. The question: Does goed exist ?
Cant be answered, beause in order to formulate a question, according to the philosophers, you have to have defined all the components in that question.
-God- isnt defined, we dont know what god is, so the question :
"Does God exist"" cant be answered.
And if you say: God is omnipotent (he can do anything) you bump into a problem.
Because if he is omnipotent, he could create a rock so heavy, that even he cant lift it. But if he cant lift it, he's not omnipotent.. and if he cant create the rock, he isnt omnipotent either.

Another example is describing time,.. few people can define it.
A famous quote is : "If no one asks me I know, but if i have to explain it to someone who asks, I dont"
A few years ago a few scientist finally managed to give a definition of time, WIHTOUT using time related words. If you give a definition of time, you cant use words that involve time, becuase that has to be defined still.
The definition was 2 A-4 pages I believe.

So language is usually the problem.

As much as heat creates cold and vice versa, dark creates light and vice versa, it's us that create space. Space is that what's between to objects.
If there are two planets, there'll be space between them, its the consequence language puts on the fact that there are two things, and they arent in the same place.

I'm gonna stop now, I lost track of myself writing this .. have no idea what i wrote anymore [img]tongue.gif[/img] Hope it makes sense ;)

Makes alot of sense. Very good post [img]smile.gif[/img]

Those are all relative terms that describe the effect that certain physical phenomena have on our human senses, nothing more. In a Platonic sense, they cannot exist without comparative objects, and a human observer.

Exactly,.. that was basically what took me 20 times more lines to say [img]tongue.gif[/img]
( But offcourse I felt the need to show how intelligent I was by giving a lot of examples )

Karlosevic:
Waves, be it radio or anything else .. can travel through vacuum.
Waves in vacuum travel with the speed of light ( cant go faster than that ).
The fact that they dont encounter any resistance, doesnt mean they'll go infinitely fast. Nothing can go faster than the speed of light for a lot of reasons.
1. Speed affects time, the fasten you go, the slower time goes.
This is relative ( einsteins relativity-theory ), time will pass slower for you, compared to other independant observers.
The closer you get to the speed of light, the slower time goes .. a consequence is that it takes infinitely long to go faster than the speed of light.
2. Speed increases mass, the faster you go, the heavier you become.
Closing on the speed of light, a particle would become infinitely heavy and it would take an infinite amount of energy to get him to go faster.

There are some more reasons why it's not possible, but properly explaining the last two would take me a lot of pages already, so I'll stop [img]tongue.gif[/img] .

Anywayz,.. the fact that there's a delay when you send radio-waves from A to B through space is not evidence that space is nothing or has infinitely low density.

EDIT:
And indeed, the fact that space is infinte, doesnt mean its without bounds.
It simply implies that it will continue to expand forever.
Some scientist now think the universe IS finite. We all know gravity, and we also know that gravity attracts. One mass attracts the other.
A theory is that the expanding universe now,.. is a result of the Big Bang, the planets still have some impuls left of that explosion. Eventually however, the gravity is going to counteract that and the universe will collapse on itself. At this point however, the universe is still accelerating ( expanding going faster). However, at the centre of our system, there's a Huge black hole, ( not your average black hole, but a thousand times bigger ).
So there's quite a few things pulling us back at the moment [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 01-05-2003, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: daan ]

Or to put it another, similar way;

Dark, Cold and Space exist at the very least as terms for the conditions of absences of light, heat and 'any thing'.

Therefore if the condition exists, the term for that condition is describing something that exists, and language allows us to state that 'Darkness exists' for eg. because due to language, you are really saying, 'the condition described by the word darkness, exists'.

ANOTHER VERY SIMILAR WAY:

Dark, cold, and space(Vacuum) do not exist as objects since they have no mass but instead exist as a state that something can be in.

Not really true Attalus. Heat is energy. And there is always energy. Therefore there will always be heat and lack of heat. [img]graemlins/blueblink.gif[/img] Expressions like warmth and cold are human observations though. And I´m glad of them! Otherwise we would have to measure particle speed and movement to get an idea of temperature. Bah! ;) :D

I havent read through this whole thread, so this may have already been stated but..

I think coldness exist. There is a source of coldness. What about blizzards, chill winds and such.

The other two are pretty complex. Darkness is just lack of light, there is no source for it..And I have never really pondered the space one.

There has never been true coldness; absoolute zero has never been achieved and so every temperature felt is just a very small amount of heat energy being radiateed, no matter how cold.

That is true, my dear <font color=pink>Willow</font>, and I should not have said them had the term "heat" been under consideration. But, the terms that are under discussion are "Dark, cold, and space." Which, as I said, are relative terms for lack of heat/energy, lack of light, and lack of discernable masses. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

A blizzard and chill wind don't create cold, they are cold because they have no heat.

The default setting for the universe is cold, not hot or luke warm. If nothing existed, all would be dark, cold and space (nothing). No heat, no light, no matter.

In our universe suns create heat. Movement, friction, life itself creates heat.

On the matter of space, space is nothing. On earth, what we call space actually contains air, but the word space is in this case defined by a relative lack as has been stated.

However, on the matter of space being infinite....

How can space be infinite?

So the universe is expanding (which implies a limit or end, for only that with boundaries can expand their boundary otherwise it would already be where it's expanding into) fair enough, and it has said that it's expanding into infinite space.

But space is finite. It stops where something is. Finite. WIth limit.

There is no space where there is a sun. Or a rock, or wind, or a tree, or an asteroid.

So space is not infinite, because it has finite boundaries of substance.

So we have a finite universe expanding into finite space, though it could expand infinitely.... or will until it contracts.

[ 01-05-2003, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

If this is the case than what do you call the space that used to be occupied by a larger universe? Is that space now nothing? or dose it exist?

On that basis - does heat exist as well? If we take the accepted thesis that heat is derived from the "existance and release" of energy, and that cold things lack energy or the ability to release it - can we truly state that heat exists? When it boils down to it, things are just in a continual state of energy exchange, and hot and cold are just descriptors for the level of energy transferred or emitted.

Of course I could say that I know that cold exists because of the effect it's having on me at this very moment. (But I won't) ;)

As for space, the expanding universe, infinity and what was there before it was created - I spent years thinking about this as a child. What I learned was that it gives me a headache so I don't do it any more.

Does defeat exist or is it just the absence of victory?

Depends if defeat entails reversion to a pre-conflict prior state, or a loss and reduction worse than the situation before conflict.

Doesn't it? :D

Do trophies exist - we seem to have no absence of them in our cupboard - and the Ashes look as if they are coming over next time ;)

Do trophies exist - we seem to have no absence of them in our cupboard - and the Ashes look as if they are coming over next time ;) </font>[/QUOTE]I refer the Right Honourable Gentleman to the 4th line in my sig!

Do trophies exist - we seem to have no absence of them in our cupboard - and the Ashes look as if they are coming over next time ;) </font>[/QUOTE]I refer the Right Honourable Gentleman to the 4th line in my sig!</font>[/QUOTE]Uhhh - yeah - what he said :D

I don’t know if that’s absolutely true. The Japanese were on the loosing side of WWII. They were defeated. Today they are certainly in a better situation than they were prior to the conflict.