Is nothingness a relativity?

Is nothingness a relativity?

~~~ There is no such thing as 'nothing', by definition.

'Nothingness' exists as a word on this monitor, as everything exists! EveryTHING! For something to exist it must be perceived. That which is not perceived, cannot/does not exist. The better our eyes become (instruments for observation), the more that we find 'stuff' in what has been previously been called 'emptiness'!

There is no perfect vacuum!

It is just out shortsightedness that 'imagines' such a thing.

"Consciousness is the ground of all being!" - Copenhagen interpretation of QM

Everywhere!

There is no 'nothing'!

Existence = the complete Universe = Reality = Consciousness = Truth = 'Self!' = God = Brahman = Tao ...

ALL INCLUSIVE!!

Everything exists! All inclusive!

Everything is Real! All inclusive!

Existence/Reality is all inclusive!

That which is perceived exists. All inclusive!

That which exists is perceived. All inclusive!

Not a thing exists (notice that I didn't say that 'nothing' exists, 'cause it don't! *__- ) that is not perceived. All inclusive!

Not a thing is perceived that does not exist. All inclusive!

There is no, nor can there be, any evidence to the contrary!

"The complete Universe (Reality/Truth/God/'Self!'/Tao/Brahman... or any feature herein...) can be defined/described as the synchronous sum-total of all Perspectives!" - Book of Fudd

ALL INCLUSIVE!!!

Nothingness in definition has no qualities---> so also no 'volume'--> which makes it a 'written-paper mind idea' nothing more.

A 'absolute nothingness' could (exist) in a different quantum space or even in our quantum space because it has 'no volume'! You could also say that the universe is filled with non-existing brainless chickens for that matter.

Everything is a relativity due to the lack of 'absolute information'.

Written information can differ from reality:

like 1+1=2 nice on paper but in reality there are no two identical objects.

1 sheep + 1 sheep = 2 ANIMALS but not 2 sheep for the sheep would have to be identical which is impossible(quantum)

So 'absolute nothingness' is a written statement that boggles the mind and tries to get an individual to search for his own mind boundaries and fantasizing abilities(within philosophy) but is not of a 'practical use' and can not be implemented in our reality(like 1 sheep + 1 sheep =2 sheep is not true in reality only on paper)

The issue here is that you need to specify what you mean by "absolute". If by "absolute" you mean "all-encompassing" then yes, it is a contradiction. If by "absolute" you mean that whatever is in nothing ceases to be, then no, there is no contradiction. Something can become nothing if that something had a contingent existence, such as an idea. If you don't believe in the existence of an afterlife or a soul, then any ideas that you once had but never shared or wrote down would disappear right along with your consciousness upon death. Maybe a bit of clarification on what you mean by "absolute" would help answer your question.

Nothingness is the basic structural skeleton of the universe, completely static, hard and rigid real matter.

This is like a computer screen a set of pixels, the universe is an image moves and expands by on and off of the pixels of nothingness also called dimensional fabrics.

What looks materialistic is actually an image and nothingness is actual material of this universe.

The present moment of time, facilitates the pixel to be on and off.

Not at all. There is not even nothingness.

expensive LocustEater, First some comments: by using the lights furniture of the cosmological luminaries of our time, there grew to become into no "earlier" to the BANGing of the super. there grew to become into basically a factor of Singularity - sans area, time, remember, action, and perhaps, gKnowing. I conceive it as endless skill. Its thought is persevering with transforming into As you stated, it is definitely a paradox, perhaps the main profound paradox. And, to paraphrase Alan Watts, a paradox is the certainty status on its head to get interest. i'm reminded of examining as quickly as some time past that the sacred, un-pronounceable call, the tetragrammaton of the Hebrew custom has at its root an historic Chaldee verb which skill consistent transforming into. of direction, the main easy euphemism is "god" or "God". I, in spite of the undeniable fact that could term it "the Godhead" to distinguish it from all the basically human concepts. (The general anthropomorphic, Liliputian notions so often seen in this sight strike a cord in me of the previous asserting "How the robust have fallen!") Singularity, The Godhead, despite, the referent is the main suitable Transcendence. between the failings it transcends is the understanding of human beings being which incorporate i'm. in short, i'm no longer able to respond to your question. although phrased in a distinctive way, it is my question too. We each could desire to respond to it ourselves. i've got faith the respond lies in the consistent transforming into, in the gnosis of our person person. And in it extremely is Immanence.

nothingnes is a relativity, its like tempurature. cold is just an absense of heat. nothingness is just an absense of stuff.

Nothingness does. not. exist. Stop wanking about it, people.

...no.