On 04 May 2012, at 17:48, John Clark wrote:
> If the nothing of a vacuum is really full of potentials,
If you insist on the strictest definition of "nothing" which is not
even the potential of producing anything, then even God Himself
could not produce something from nothing; and this line of thought
is quite clearly leading precisely nowhere.
At the meta level of a theory, "nothing" and "everything" are
basically equivalent with respect to the difficulty to be define them.
In set theory, everything (the "universe" of set) is given by the
unary intersection of the empty set, for example. And the quantum
vacuum, needs the whole non trivial assumption of quantum mechanics.
The "no" and the "every" in "nothing and everything" depend on the
logical assumptions. The real difficulty is in the definition or
choice of the notion of "things".
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
