Nothingness Since a few people seem to actually think I might have something to say, I would like to say something about nothingness. I believe that all this discussion of the subject is like many disagreements a failure to agree on what words mean. As I pointed out to Mazulu, English language explanations depend on words which have inexact meanings and so each person who listens must interpret the meanings based on their own contexts. I have been in many “discussions” where this has been a problem later resolved by comparing definitions of some term. When I use the term empty space, I am referring to space that has no (or virtually no) matter in it. I recognize that it is not truly empty. As I understand it there is energy there. I would say something about why there is energy there but I would probably get it wrong. So it is not truly empty or nothingness. But we sometimes use the two terms interchangeably to mean space vacant of objects. Having read some Eastern Philosophy, nothingness has a distinct meaning there. I think it is superior to western ideas. Nothingness is similar to the idea in set theory of the empty set. Believe it or not some people have a big problem getting their head around the empty set. As an example of what that means I will use an analogy from a book by a famous discredited Anthropologist describing some probably non-existent Native American belief system. Image your self in a cafe sitting at a table. The universe is represented by the table. Everything you can name is sitting on the table. You are the salt shaker, the fork is the Earth, the spoon is Mathematics, the speed of light is the napkin. There is a box of toothpicks that represent everything else you can think of. And “empty” space is the table cloth. And Mazulu, if Gods existed they would be in the rack of various pancake syrups left over from the morning breakfast rush. Nothingness is not on the table. The concept of nothingness has no dimension. It doesn’t have any qualities. Size and shape etc are things on the table. And surprisingly it has no quantity. You see numbers are things on the table. So in that respect the empty set which has zero elements does not work as nothingness. Another interesting thing is that any reference to nothingness is also on the table. It is an odd, confusing and inconsistent concept. The reason I bring this up is because it can be a useful idea. As I told Mazulu, nothingness is useful. According to wise guys in the far east, you can’t have anything without nothingness.