Does "nothing" have a meaning in physics?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter houlahound
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of "nothing" in physics, exploring its meaning, implications, and whether it can exist in a physical context. Participants engage with the philosophical and technical aspects of "nothing," including its relationship to concepts like vacuum and null in mathematics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the meaning of "nothing" in physics, suggesting it lacks a technical definition and is better understood through standard English.
  • Others argue that "nothing" is contentious in physics, with varying interpretations, particularly in discussions like "A Universe from Nothing."
  • A few participants propose that the distinction between "null" and "zero" is crucial, indicating that "nothing" may depend on specific definitions.
  • One participant raises the Heisenberg uncertainty principle as a potential barrier to the existence of "nothing," suggesting that a true volume of nothing may not be possible.
  • Another participant speculates on the implications of a region of "truly nothing," questioning its interaction with particles and the laws of physics, including conservation of energy and gravitational effects.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the clarity of the term "nothing," with one noting that adding "truly" does not clarify the concept.
  • There is a suggestion that there is no rigorous definition of "nothing" in physics, yet this does not imply that "nothing" is devoid of meaning.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views on the meaning and implications of "nothing" in physics, and the discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity of the term "nothing" and its dependence on philosophical interpretations, as well as the lack of a rigorous definition in the context of physics.

houlahound
Messages
907
Reaction score
223
Why is this a word if it has no meaning. Is there a physics meaning of nothing.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I know nothing about that, I'm afraid.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SammyS and OCR
its nothing to be afraid of...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: OCR and sophiecentaur
It has no technical meaning. Just the standard English meaning. Vacuum, on the other hand, has a technical meaning.
 
Whatever a "thing" is, it is what is left over when you remove it.
 
"nothing" is very contentious in Physics, and is best avoided. "A Universe from Nothing" for example, means different things to different people.
 
You've been watching too many H & R Block tax preparation commercials on TV. We're all anxious to hear what Micheo Kaku says.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: phinds
Chestermiller said:
You've been watching too many H & R Block tax preparation commercials on TV. We're all anxious to hear what Micheo Kaku says.
Actually, now that you bring it up, a good definition of "nothing" is "the scientific value of Michio Kaku's statements on physics in the last few years". :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jodo, OCR and Chestermiller
Nothing is the just the opposite of everything I believe
 
  • #10
PeTrichOr12 said:
Nothing is the just the opposite of everything I believe
And how does that work as a definition in physics?
 
  • #13
phinds said:
I don't think so. That's a math thing. This is a physics question.

Math is sometimes employed in physics, so there tends to be overlap.
 
  • #14
Landru said:
Math is sometimes employed in physics, so there tends to be overlap.
Of course, but I think not in this case.
 
  • #15
The important thing to know is that "null" is not the same as "zero", "no value" versus "a value of zero", and so the meaning of "nothing" depends on which more specific word or definition it's making reference to.
 
  • #16
Landru said:
The important thing to know is that "null" is not the same as "zero", "no value" versus "a value of zero", and so the meaning of "nothing" depends on which more specific word or definition it's making reference to.
Yes, that's my point. The question here is not about math but about physics and the universe.
 
  • #17
Can you give an example of where the distinction becomes important?
 
  • #18
Landru said:
Can you give an example of where the distinction becomes important?
Not offhand but it's important to keep in mind that, as Alfred Korzybski said, the map is not the territory.
 
  • #19
phinds said:
"nothing" is very contentious in Physics, and is best avoided.

Yeah, it's even hard to make a conclusive statement about "nothing".....:olduhh:

"A Universe from Nothing" for example, means different things to different people.

Just funning you ..... :oldbiggrin:
 
  • #20
Strawberry fields forever.
 
  • #21
I think it is a reasonable physics question to ask ie;

if there is a possibility that a volume of truly nothing; has ever, does, or can ever exist.

it appears Heisenberg uncertainty law forbids the existence of nothing if I understand it correctly.

the closest I have found is the Casimir effect.
 
  • #22
houlahound said:
I think it is a reasonable physics question to ask ie;

if there is a possibility that a volume of truly nothing; has ever, does, or can ever exist.
Adding the word "truly" in front of the word nothing does little to clarify things.

A region where nothing can ever exist would be quite interesting. What happens if you shoot a high energy electron into such a region? Does it reflect? Does it come out the other side with zero elapsed time? Does it simply disappear? How do you square this with conservation of energy? If this is a finite region with detectable behavior then it will have a measurable velocity. How is it affected by gravity? What gravitational effects does it have? Does the region grow or shrink over time? Is it possible to create such a region? If you have two such regions that intersect, do they interact? If so, how does this square with the fact that a region of nothing cannot, by definition, exist within a region of nothing?
 
  • #23
Yes indeed, I speculate nothing has not ever existed.
 
  • #24
.
 
  • #25
^ I see what you did there.
 
  • #26
To my knowledge, there's no rigorous definition of "nothing" in physics. Doesn't mean nothing is nothing, though...
 
  • #27
Closed pending moderation

Edit: some off topic posts have been removed, and the thread will remain closed
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
12K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 99 ·
4
Replies
99
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
21K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
9K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K