4 ms·
>So long as we operate from a theory of geometry, we can’t define nothingness as anything less than a space of zero-dimensionality. >This leaves us with a poin
by silent_cal 4y ago
>So long as we operate from a theory of geometry, we can’t define nothingness as anything less than a space of zero-dimensionality.
>This leaves us with a point.
That's still not nothing.
- soulofmischief 4y agoWhat interests me is that if there is only the point, there's no external system for reference. So the point has no coordinates, no observable properties... right?
- silent_cal 4y agoYou said "there is only the point", which means there is something. That's not nothing.
- soulofmischief 4y agoTo observe something, you need another reference frame. Without an external reference frame, there's no extrinsic information about the point, and if the point is dimensionless, then there is no intrinsic information, either. What you are left with, is the notion of a point, with no way to describe or observe it.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]