J
jsiyumbu
Guest
If matter occupies space, what does space occupy. Is space matter too?
- Status
C
Cristiano
Guest
Matter does not occupy space. It is spatially extended. 
Y
yppop
Guest
Hi,
I see that your profound questions haven’t attracted much attention. I took a break from this forum for a couple of weeks to rejuvenate my thought processes and I just your post. I assume that you asked those two questions honestly and are not just trying to stir up the pot, so I offer two quick answers and a more extended thought for you to think about.
My two short answers:
- Space occupies space! to understand this you should know something about the real number line.
- You inverted the second question because: Matter is space!
Because it occupies space there is no denying the objective reality of matter; and because the universe is predominantly space, it is easy to believe that space is the common substance from which matter was created. The overwhelming prevalence of space in the cosmic structure of the universe makes matter a relatively rare commodity, only 10-15%% of the mass of the universe is found in gas and stars; the rest is dark matter and dark energy. Even more interesting is that matter, a rare commodity in the vastness of the universe, is itself mostly space.
To imagine the scarcity of matter on the microscopic end of the size spectrum, we need to create a mental model. If a baseball were the size of the Earth each of its atoms would be the size of a grape. Now if the atom was the size of a grape, the nucleus would be too small to see with the naked eye. To see the nucleus of an atom we need to blow it up to the size of a ‘period’ at the end of the sentence. If the nucleus was the size of a period (look at the period), and we placed this period-size nucleus at the fifty yard line of a football field, the atom of which it is a part would have a diameter extending from end zone to end zone with nothing but space in between. Actual measurements estimate the atom is 10,000 times the size of the nucleus. The nucleus, composed of protons and neutrons sits at the center of this relatively enormous volume within which the point-like electrons swirl. Since electrons are point-like, they add virtually nothing to the volume taken up by matter within the atom. The material part of an atom (the electrons, protons, and neutrons) occupy about one-hundreth of one percent of the volume of an atom. The rest is space. As previously described, the universe is practically all space. Here we have shown that the minor part of the universe that is matter is itself practically nothing but space. One might conclude that for all practical purposes the universe is nothing but space.
These observations lead to the suggestion that the foundation of matter is spatial. Although science provides no explanation about the nature of strings, they certainly must be spatial. What else could they be? Also the Higgs mechanism that suggests that particles gain mass (become more matter-like) by absorbing Higgs particles which could only be described as a distortion of the Higgs field a space-like background filling the universe. These observations are more easily explained by discrete space than by continuous space. I suggest that, at its foundation, matter is nothing more than a configuration of discrete points of space.
Matter has form. Form is the differentiation of space. Because continuous space cannot be emptied at any location, it is impossible to differentiate continuous space. Form can only be defined by discrete space.Therefore, at the ground of reality, the basis for form, hence matter, is discrete space. With a foundation of discrete space, a model can be created that allows the spiritual aspect of reality to be explained.
Have fun,
Yppop
T
twinc
Guest
much ado about nothing - no matter - never mind - so what - more later - twinc
J
JimG
Guest
Sounds reasonable to me. But I’ve always found it intriguing that strings are conceived as having only 1 dimension, yet form the substrate of a 4D or more universe. Even more intriguing was that we always envisioned, say, photons and other basic particles as dimensionless. Yet these particles of zero dimensions somehow combine to make 2 or 3 or 4 or more dimensions? How can adding zeros make anything?
I’ve also read that at distance smaller than the Planck length, one can no longer distinguish space from time, or past from present, but maybe I didn’t understand that correctly.
Just some musings…
Y
yppop
Guest
Clever! Are you not paraphrasing a quote often attributed to the British Philospher, George Berkely, but which was more likely made by some anonymous wit to summarize the philosophies of Locke, Berkely and Hume? Namely:
“What is mind? No matter. What is Matter? Never mind”.
Quite frankly, there is much ado about nothing, but beware of the subtle connotations involved with that word’ nothing’. Whole books have been written about nothing and its multitudinous shades of meaning. Shaespierre is filled with clever plays on the word, but my favorite is from Alice in Wonderland:
“*I see nothing on the road *" Alice said.'I only wished I had such great eyes”, the King remarked in a fretful tone, ‘to be able to see Nothing! And at that distance too! Why it’s as much as I can do to see real people by this light!’”.
I did excercise a bit of poetic license in that quote, but I think you get my meaning.
Yppop
T
twinc
Guest
not at all as hilarious as it may seem,we do it all the time - btw we do not see with our eyes but through our eyes and hear through our ears,so who or what is doing the seeing and hearing etc.We are all also very busy doing nothing - it seems seeing and knowing are inner psychical processes.Why only recently science dematerialised matter and now even more recently is trying to reinstate it as even more mysterious “dark matter” etc - as a comical quote “its daft I call it” - more later as" the dead[end] of philosophy" - twinc
L
lobster
Guest
Not really. Space wouldn’t exist unless God created it.
Y
yppop
Guest
Lobster.
I fear you missed an important point that I was making, namely, there are two kinds of space: continuous and discrete. I happen to believe in the Big Bang theory that claims that ‘space’ was created when the universe emerged from the singularity at t=0. Can you imagine from what the universal space (that which gives dimension to the universe) emerged? The only thing I can imagine is that discrete space emerged from an infinite expanse of continuous space and became matter, which when put in motion resulted in manifestations of time and energy. And in this way, lobster, God created space.
I refer you to my thread for further discussion of this subject; it is now fading into the sunset on page 12 of this forum.
By the way lobster, are you from Maine or South Africa?
Yppop
L
lobster
Guest
Interesting concept and idea which of course I am well versed in, though it is an explanation which doesn’t have all of the pieces. For a universe to expand out of a singularity, the properties of that expansion would have to be created. In fact before there was anything there was nothing, but God. That of course also includes both continuous and discrete space.
Possibly the Big Bang theory does have an explanation for when space was created (at the beginning of time of course).
No, because it didn’t exist until God created it. No space, no nothing. If you can think it, it didn’t exist. If you can think it, it is not God.
Possibly so, however the infinite expanse of continuous space had to come from somewhere.
One day maybe I might even begin to grasp how God creates. Until then, it is a mystery to me.
South African lobster doesn’t even compare.
Y
yppop
Guest
What interesting concept are you referring to: the nature of space or the big bang?
Of course, as you might know, discrete space is integrated within continuous space, but can be completely removed and still leave behind and infinity of continuous space. This property of space allows one to use reason (per Fides et Ratio) to imagine a foundation from which to explain: (1) *creatio ex nihilo * and (2) the integration of the spritual with the material as was suggested by Teilhard de Chardin’s within and without.
No explanation, merely a supposition.
The Shroud of Turin allows me to imagine (think) of Jesus, whom I believe is God. In order to prevent my thoughts from wandering during the Consecration, at Mass, I bow my head, close my eyes and contemplate the face of God (Jesus). Sometimes I succeed, sometimes I don’t. But that just me. For now I will concede your point. that the face that sometimes appears doesn’t exist, that it is merely a figment of my imagination, and I am sure that the atheists in this forum would agree with that.
One thing I can’t think is “nothing”; the void that I imagine always has some dimensionality. The the only thing that qualifies as ‘nothing’ is a single spatial point; otherwise one has to deal with that pesky dimensionality. The problem I find with your proclamation about thought and existence is that it seems to restrict the word ‘exist’ to objective reality. I prefer to define existence at four levels: objective, subjective, rational, and transcendent. I engage my existence at all 4 levels. I do it in the spirit explained in this excerpt from fides et ratio:
22.In the first chapter of his Letter to the Romans, Saint Paul helps us to appreciate better the depth of insight of the Wisdom literature’s reflection. Developing a philosophical argument in popular language, the Apostle declares a profound truth: through all that is created the “eyes of the mind” can come to know God. Through the medium of creatures, God stirs in reason an intuition of his “power” and his “divinity” (cf. Rom 1:20). This is to concede to human reason a capacity which seems almost to surpass its natural limitations. Not only is it not restricted to sensory knowledge, from the moment that it can reflect critically upon the data of the senses, but, by discoursing on the data provided by the senses, reason can reach the cause which lies at the origin of all perceptible reality. In philosophical terms, we could say that this important Pauline text affirms the human capacity for metaphysical enquiry.
The infinite expanse of continuous space, which contained discrete space, always existed. God created objective reality from discrete space and immersed it in continuous space to allow the spiritual to guide creation.
To me also; but He gave me this inquisitive mind to think about it and when those ideas show up I try to put them in a religious contest.
I agree!!
Thanks for your time,
Yppop
- Status