Does darkness exist?

Question

Here is a riddle for you brainiacs. My light-bulb went off and I've found myself in a chaos! 5 points and a pat on the back for the one who can save me.

If absence of light is darkness, then what is the absence of darkness? Light? Nothing? Darkness again? All? None?
Going outside the literal meaning of words; if the lack of light is lack of light; is lack of lack of it, is or isn’t something? Here are few possibilities I've thought of, none of it answers.

If darkness doesn’t exist and is ‘’nothing’’, then what about the ''possibility'' of the light? if the possibility of light would alter nothingness, if we can simply make darkness disappear, how can it be nothing? How can we make ‘’nothing’’ disappear? Isn't nothing already nothing? So then darkness is not ''nothing'' but it's a ''possibility'', a possibility of light. And since we can't create or disappear, then we can not consider darkness as nothing either.

Ok so darkness is ‘’something’’, and it exist. Why can’t we measure it?

How about the idea of darkness and light converts from one another? Like a Ying-Yang symbol, or ‘’yes and no’’; only exists if the other side exists. Once again, we accept darkness exist, why can’t we measure it??

Maybe and the absence of one only prevails the other, maybe natural selection also applies for darkness and light as well? Which ever is stronger will be the evident and prevail. But then here it is, one more time, we accept darkness exist, WHY CAN’T WE MEASURE IT?

For some reason I find contradiction in the idea of that darkness is the absence of light, and light is the presence of light, because light just is and darkness is only lack of it. This thing is real I’m telling you, it’s in my room right now! it’s not just the broken light-bulb! :)))

Ps. For the note I’m talking about a pure darkness here, zero photons. I know the pure darkness with no photons in it doesn’t exist and considered as ‘’impossible’’ to create through science but let’s try and imagine what mankind haven’t achieved yet, let’s try and imagine the impossible. After all it is this belief has turned yesterday’s impossible into today’s possibilities. And who knows, maybe one day human kind will invent a light-bulb that’ll never go off… ;)

Answer 1

Sorry, darkness is nothing. You can't measure nothing, because, it is, as you guessed, nothing. You can measure light energy at an infinite number of points across the spectrum, (infra-red to ultra-violet) but in those cases we have waves that we are measuring.

It is difficult to get to nothing-ness. I will grant you that because the cosmic background radiation fills the entire known universe. That means that there is a diffuse amount of energy everywhere. However as the universe continues to expand, and if you make the assumption that mass/energy are finite, there will be a time in the extremely distant future in which you could have some portion of space that is completely empty, even of the CBR. But once you tried to measure it, it wouldn't be empty and as such not completely dark. Thus my hypothesis is that darkness in the manner in which you describe can never be measured, it can only be assumed to exist when the volume of space is greater than the amount of mass and energy

Answer 2

Darkness is the base state, which the universe would be in without light. Perhaps the best way to look at it is to imagine light laid on as a veneer over the top, take the light away, and you're left with darkness again.

in other words if there is darkness, the potential for light is there too, and vice versa. Also, both are mutually exclusive.

There are many such things that people say have balances, the yin yang is a prime illustration. Good and Evil, Light and Dark. The universe is at a constant dynamic equilibrium.

Answer 3

First of all, the ability to "measure" something is not a prerequisite for something to exist.

Second of all, darkness is NOT nothing. Darkness is the absence of light. That is what it is. You can go around and around with circular arguments about what it is and what it isn't, but that doesn't change the fact that darkness is the absence of light. The absence of darkness, therefore, is light. They are reciprocal. Pretty much everything else you've said here is changing the definition of the terms, making it invalid.

Answer 4

My first question to you is, so what?
Why does this even take your time?

In absencens of light you have darkness, because total darkness is the total absence of light. So if you don't have darkness, you have some light. On the light scale (like a number scale), darkness is zero. But unlike a number scale there is no negative. There is zero light or some light. So in the absence of darkness (that is you aren't at zero on that light scale) you have something -- the only thing it can be is light.

Answer 5

Darkness is simply the absence of light, unless--and only under these conditions--the darkness is the result of the absorption of light. Consider for the moment the color we call black. Granted, that color can made by an absence of light, but it is also made when all light is absorbed by a substance; nothing is reflected.

Now what does this scientific explanation have to do with the philosophy behind your question? Well, consider this; in every act we call evil, there are only these two possibilities, the evil that results from the absence of goodness, or the evil that results from the total absorption of all that is goodness and giving none of it back. The true essence of what many religions and philosophies call goodness can be distilled into the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Or the variation of it; never do to others something you wouldn't want done to yourself. In either aspect, it denotes a certain giving, a sharing of oneself, an ability to exist beyond one's own skin and sharing one's gifts and talents with those that are around one. Not for one's own sake, but out of an unselfish caring-affection-compassion for others. Such a person not only "receives the light", he or she "reflects it back" into the world him or her.

Darkness can be a total absorption into one's own self. I once knew a girl who, when 9-11 happened, showed no sympathy toward the victims. Why? Because, and I quote here, "none of it has anything to do with me." It didn't matter to her because, as far as she could see, it didn't affect her in any way. She was totally closed in on herself. Ironically, she was given to severe doubts of depression. Sometimes I wonder whatever happened to her. In any event, I would say her apathy did not serve her well. Apathy never serves any one well.

How can one measure the darkness? By the absence of light, yes, but also by the reaction to light. Light is the first primordial thing, and it is sent everywhere, but, like American Express, it isn't accepted everywhere. And sadly, sometimes it is accepted, but then isn't reflected. So the absence of darkness would indeed be light.

Not all darkness is nothing, but in regards to the darkness you refer that is nothing, I put this to you; "in the beginning, there was nothing, and then God said, 'Let there be Light'." Now, in case you don't believe in that sort of thing, let me just say that in some quantum theories, light is still the first thing. Light poured forth, and into the abyss where nothing once was, there now exists light, in all forms. Light and darkness still have their Yin/Yang relationship, as you refered to, because Light is Something, while Darkness is Nothing; but it is the presence of both that helps each define the other. To have a "lack of lack" is to lack nothing, hence having everything in all its fullness. Goodness, we've just described Godhood! But aside from that, please remember that even though I've described that second kind of darkness to you, that its results are the same as the first kind. Granted, the second kind of darkness is something, as opposed to the first; however, it produces nothing. It reflects no light; it only consumes it. Just as the first, nothing procedes from it; it simply is. It is a black hole, and is much worse than the first.

Answer 6

properly, i assume you're precise, yet right this is my arguement (im a splash extra pesimistic) mild is the abscence of darkness. each and every thing is dark, till you shine a mild on it. You cant shine a dismal on some thing. Darkness is often modern in nature. using the theroy without put off above, there is often darkness till you shine a mild, then it is going someplace else. Darkness is like capability, you cant create or smash it, in simple terms circulate it around. different than that, i think of it truly is powerful.

Answer 7

Darkness is just another word to describe the amount of light.

Want to really boggle the mind? Take this problem and apply it to the concepts of 'war' and 'peace'. Is the absence of war, peace? Then if peace is nothing but the absence of war, does peace exist?

Answer 8

ok, first things first, it's yang-YIN (no G), not ying-yang, and they are NOT equal, Yang was associated with "the sun and all things male, strong, warm and active; yin was associated with the moon and all things female, dark, cold, weak, and passive..." and was used "...to compel greater obedience and passivity from women" in China during the Shang period.(1)

secondly, there is no such thing as darkness, just like there is no such thing as cold, they are both the absence of something else, light and heat respectively. You cannot create cold or create darkness, you have to find a way to destory or block heat or light.

Answer 9

Maybe this quote will hit the spot?

Job 10:22 22 To the land of obscurity like gloom, of deep shadow And disorder, where it beams no more than gloom does."

Answer 10

My weary asker, all you have to do is close your eyes and see(feel) it for yourself....lol

Total absolute darkness does not exist though, not even in this world, that's how powerful the light is.

Enjoy!