Is it possible everything exists because of referential integrity of nothingness?

Question

Did the universe spring into existence because of the referential integrity of nothingness? Or am i just having a linguistic rather than conceptual brainfart? What I am asking is that: in order to have nothing, you need something. And vice versa. Are we living on the flipside of nothing!?

Answer 1

We try to think of the unthinkable by thinking through only the thinkable; similarly we try to see what cannot be seen with only what can be seen. When we try to see what can be seen with what has already been seen, we do the right thing. This is how the ever-spreading circles of our knowledge grow wider. All that we can know we can know with what has already been known – knowledge is interdependent for it definitions and every things is referential.

All things contain one or more other things as their characteristic to assume unique and definitive character of their own; all changes and variations among things and gradual and transient; all things can become other things by gradually changing their characteristic attributes.

Existence is an infinite singularity that cannot be halved, or doubled. It is, or it is not. There is not third option. If it is not, then it is not a thing – a nothing. Nothingness is not a thing existence. It is not a possibility for anything to be. It is impossibility, and not in existence.

Nothingness is a virtual; none real concept of human minds whose presence depends upon existence. Without existence the concept of nothingness cannot be conceived. Nothingness is only in the mind as a realisation or demonstration of the imitativeness of our physical world. We can reach large numbers by counting, and all counting starts from one – the singularity of existence, the greatest number of existence. But we cannot reach the largest number how so many ions we spend in counting. There is no limit upon the number line. This way we realise our limited resources. On the other side if we count back, we reach a null, or a zero, which again is none real entity – zero is symmetrical opposite of number one in existence.

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiPcnK6PXk40.1JN7rSTJaEgBgx.?qid=20060922060042AATOOMq

Answer 2

Why do you need something in order to have nothing? Non-existence can seem to "exist" without any corresponding existence. Unicorns, for example, do not exist (except in imagination) but their non-existence does not correspond to any existing thing. If you say that the existence of the idea of a unicorn is the existant counter-part to non-existing unicorns, I would only have to point to any other possible idea which has never been conceived. If all instances of non-existing do not need to be balanced by an existing thing, then why assume that the universe is any different? You say that in order to have nothing, you need something, but this isn't the case for unicorns, fairies, flums, norks, etc. It seems like there is an infinite number of non-existing things, but probably only a finite number of existing things. Just going on that, things that do not exist would not be able to always correspond to a thing that existed, and if you will make an exception for one non-existing thing, then it seems like you would have no ground to say that nothing requires something, because you would then have admitted that some nothings do not require corresponding somethings. If you are willing to admit that some "nothings" do not need "somethings," then doesn't it seem that it is not true that "nothing" needs "something"? If a unicorn doesn't need an existing counter-part, then why does the universe?

Answer 3

When you say no thing what do you mean?
More to the point what is a thing?

Do you mean 'so called' empty space.

Isn't the prerequisite for all existence to have space to be? To stand out from.

Why not call nothing everything.

Everything and something.

A timeless boundless everything from which we can grasp something.

Maybe your question is outside the realm of opposites.

Answer 4

Actually it's the referential integrity of something which bounds nothing. Something arises from nothing when referenced with an extradimensional space.
A 2 dimensional space may contain "Nothing" but with reference to the 3rd dimension there maybe something.

Answer 5

There is no such thing as nothing! If you ever succeed in finding "nothing" you will soon realize there is "something". It will be you, alone, and you will be God and have to create the universe out of nothing to prevent going mad from loneliness. But the established truths of entanglement ( the God effect) in Quantum theory gives hope that you will not be alone. Something is there in what we supposed was nothing that is sentient and active.

Answer 6

When you get right down to the smallest "particles" such as electrons and light, everything is made up of collections of charged nothings. It's all about the dimensions of existence. Remember the Q.

Answer 7

A name or symbol for something or nothing doesn't change its properties A concept is simply information, it dosnt make nothing something its just nothing has a label and concept now so it can be communicated, we havnt made nothing into something or a concept, we made the concept of nothing xD

Answer 8

Yes it is possible, however you are still bound by duality - nothing and something are actually the same thing - perhaps

Answer 9

Form is Emptiness. And Emptiness is Form. You only exist because you don't. And because you don't you do.

Answer 10

You came into this world without anything, you will leave it the same