Dark, Cold, Space. Do these exist?

[Vaskez]

Originally posted by Leonis: If Cold is nothing but a lack of energy (heat) and Dark is nothing but a lack of energy (light) and Space is nothing; It can be concluded that Cold, Dark and Space are one and the same.... [img]tongue.gif[/img]

True, it's the same concept viewed from different perspectives. What you just said is just like describing an empty space by saying: "there're no people there" and then describing it by saying: "there're no buildings there". In the end, they both amount to the same thing but emphasise different perspectives.

[Callum Kerr]

Cold, in my point of view, exists, but it is inattainable (or unattainable?)... as you need to get to -273'C odd... the TOTAL lack of heat... but it is impossible to do this as the heat needs to go somewhere colder... and there IS nothing colder than ultimate 0... Dark also exists and is much more easily attainable as it is not contained within particles... btw, if i am wrong, blame my physics teacher for not telling me the truth... for example, a coupla weeks ago, he revealed that life DOESN'T travel in straight lines...

Oh yeah, and space exists, it is otherwise known as a vacuum...

(if any of this has been said... forgive me... i couldn't be bothered to sort through three pages...)

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Callum Kerr: for example, a coupla weeks ago, he revealed that life DOESN'T travel in straight lines...

That was very philosophical of him [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Azred]

The questions relating to the existence of cold and dark have been answered: cold is a relative concept and requires two objects to exist; likewise for dark.

Space also is a relative concept requiring two objects (actually three) to exist. If you pick one object, then "space" is simply the distance between two objects that do not occupy the same location, relative to the first object chosen.

The question Yorick posed is quite simple to answer as long as you remember two simple facts:
1) Everything exists and 2) Nothing exists.

The ability to perceive an object or conceive a concept is not a prerequisite for the object or concept to exist.

[ 01-07-2003, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Azred ]

[Night Stalker]

Ah, but you can't proove that nothing exists (counter intuitive), like wise you can't proove something does not exist. Negatives can only be supported or not supported by positive proofs.

[Vaskez]

Originally posted by Callum Kerr: Cold, in my point of view, exists, but it is inattainable (or unattainable?)... as you need to get to -273'C odd... the TOTAL lack of heat... but it is impossible to do this as the heat needs to go somewhere colder... and there IS nothing colder than ultimate 0... Dark also exists and is much more easily attainable as it is not contained within particles... btw, if i am wrong, blame my physics teacher for not telling me the truth... for example, a coupla weeks ago, he revealed that life DOESN'T travel in straight lines... Oh yeah, and space exists, it is otherwise known as a vacuum... (if any of this has been said... forgive me... i couldn't be bothered to sort through three pages...)

Read my earlier post on page 2 then you'll understand why yours is wrong. I blame your physics teacher [img]tongue.gif[/img] Cold, dark and space do NOT exist as they are all simply the lack of something that does exist. But read my post for explanations.

[Vaskez]

Originally posted by Azred: The questions relating to the existence of cold and dark have been answered: cold is a relative concept and requires two objects to exist; likewise for dark. Space also is a relative concept requiring two objects (actually three) to exist. If you pick one object, then "space" is simply the distance between two objects that do not occupy the same location, relative to the first object chosen. The question Yorick posed is quite simple to answer as long as you remember two simple facts: 1) Everything exists and 2) Nothing exists. The ability to perceive an object or conceive a concept is not a prerequisite for the object or concept to exist.

That's very nice but something is said to exist if it influences things around it. We can be pretty sure that a rock exists as it exerts pressure on the ground below it (this can be measured) and it also stops air flow in that area of space etc. Therefore for all intents and purposes it exists. There is no point saying otherwise unless you say that nothing exists in which case there is no point in even having the word "exists" and there is no point in us being here and talking about this.

[/)eathKiller]

2 can probably be found in the 4rth dimension which exists between what we see on the outside. Lets just take your desk for example. We see the top and bottom and all around the outside of the desk, but we only see its surface, we cannot see what is inside because it is layered and solid. The 4rth dimension is the infinate depth and solidity which cannot be measured between the outside of dimensions, it is volume itself. We cannot even use a logical math system to understand it fully. What is between surfaces cannot be simulated by any machine perfectly, our graphics engiens would slow to a stop if we even tried running such math on the best machines we have today, that's because knowing what's between things is pointless because we, ourselves, don't see the world like that. Darkness exists between something because it cannot be seen, Cold is there because no heat can reach inside the center of concrete. Space? Ok this is where there is no space [img]tongue.gif[/img] The 4rth dimension is where we understand the lack of space...

[Vaskez]

Originally posted by /)eathKiller: 2 can probably be found in the 4rth dimension which exists between what we see on the outside. Lets just take your desk for example. We see the top and bottom and all around the outside of the desk, but we only see its surface, we cannot see what is inside because it is layered and solid. The 4rth dimension is the infinate depth and solidity which cannot be measured between the outside of dimensions, it is volume itself. We cannot even use a logical math system to understand it fully. What is between surfaces cannot be simulated by any machine perfectly, our graphics engiens would slow to a stop if we even tried running such math on the best machines we have today, that's because knowing what's between things is pointless because we, ourselves, don't see the world like that. Darkness exists between something because it cannot be seen, Cold is there because no heat can reach inside the center of concrete. Space? Ok this is where there is no space [img]tongue.gif[/img] The 4rth dimension is where we understand the lack of space...

That sounds like a physics lesson gone wrong. The 4th dimension is TIME.

[Sir Kenyth]

First point. Absolute zero is to the low end of the physical spectrum as infinity is to the high end. An unattainable reference point. Getting to absolute nothing is as infinite a task as reaching infinity.

I don't think there is such a thing as a single point of no mass in our universe any more than there is a single point of infinite mass. Just because we haven't discovered particles smaller than photons does not mean they don't exist. Just that we cannot detect them. There may well be particles to whom our densest material is completely permeable. I feel there are just different levels of the presence of matter throughout every square inch of the universe. Therefore, without matter to define it, space does not in effect exist! You cannot travel outside our physical universe as your very presence as matter would define where you were as part of the boundaries of our physical universe.