1. PF Contest - Win "Conquering the Physics GRE" book! Click Here to Enter
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Thing of nothing

  1. Aug 24, 2009 #1
    Is there any thing which is made of NOTHING?????
    Since energy is conserved, so when anything is form it must be something at last time, then what about the formation of fundamental element QUARKS.......
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 24, 2009 #2
    how could you make something out of nothing?
  4. Aug 24, 2009 #3


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The only thing that could be composed of nothing is pure vacuum, which doesn't actually exist. Even in what might appear to be a pure vacuum, there are quantum fluctuations.
  5. Aug 24, 2009 #4
    I think he means what are fundamental particles made out of.

    String theory talks about oscillating "strings of energy" being the basis of the fundamental particles, though I don't know what is actually meant by that.

    There is another theory, loop quantum gravity, which conceives of space time as being made up of minuscule chunks connected together by abstract links. Some think that the fundamental particles are actually braids in the links which connect these volumes of space. In which case we would actually http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19125645.800-you-are-made-of-spacetime.html", which I suppose is as close to nothing as you can get.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  6. Aug 24, 2009 #5
    Well, technically everything is made of nothing, which happens to be something. I think most particles could be considered condensing energy propogating at <C. I don't think it's much more than a ripple in space though. It's something though.
  7. Aug 24, 2009 #6
    nothing is made out of nothing...therefore nothing is made out of nothing...maybe...
  8. Aug 24, 2009 #7
    Exactly what i was thinking!
  9. Aug 25, 2009 #8
    Actually this question is still under research, because we can yet see the effect, not the cause.

    The problem is that we can't see everything, this actually is a big problem, that physics depends on the observer. In the microscopic dimensions, if you start by going deeper and deeper, you first find the crystal structure of a solid, go deeper you find the molecules or atoms, deeper would be nucleus, deeper... here is the problem. Standard model (the claimer to the existence of quarks) says it's quarks, and gives a loooooooooooooooot of elementary particles, I actually (personally) don't agree with standard model, because it's just like you're answering a question with some other question. I'm sure if you go deeper than quarks you're gonna find some other particles, more and more and more, therefore we need some very fundamental field theory that agrees with Einstein's energy description, when he said that energy converts to mass.
    The only reason we say Einstein is a genius is because he saw what can't be seen, and imagined something in a new dimensions that human will never be able, let's not say to see, but even to imagine.

    I think the answer to your question is this:

    "nothing" means no energy, "something" means there is energy. With this you start using energy to build strings (strings theory), then you build all elementary particles and fields however you wish, and you start from the only unit which is energy.

    I hope I didn't mess up something :P

    Good luck :)
  10. Aug 25, 2009 #9
    Simply put, nothing is an impossible state.
  11. Aug 25, 2009 #10
    I don't understand what you mean!
  12. Aug 25, 2009 #11


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    No, energy is "something" so your statement "everything is made of nothing" is (technically) false.
  13. Aug 25, 2009 #12
    hey the distroyer!!
    can u tell me if the theory of everything can describe anything of the thing of nothing????
  14. Aug 25, 2009 #13
    It's simple really. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. There's always something.
  15. Aug 25, 2009 #14
    I have a little bottle at home with nothing inside. I labeled the bottle correspondingly: "Nothing". Before I kept there decayed µ-mesons (it was labeled "Decayed µ-mesons").
  16. Aug 25, 2009 #15


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    This thread has deteriorated into silliness and random speculations. It is done.

Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook