5 Answers

  1. The answer depends on what counts as “absolute emptiness”. About 100-150 years ago, it was believed that the space that does not contain atoms of matter (that is, a vacuum) is empty. Of course, even the void of deep space contains particles, at least one per many cubic kilometers. However, it is perfectly legal to imagine a volume in which there is not a single particle.

    However, modern physics accepts that a vacuum is not just “nothing is there”. It is filled with quantized fields (an ideal vacuum is the lowest energy state of the field). Under certain conditions, particles can be born in it: briefly (so-called virtual), or permanently – for example, electron-positron pairs. With this in mind, whether to call an ideal physical vacuum “absolute emptiness” is a matter of taste.

  2. No. Nature does not tolerate emptiness. There is no absolute void in the universe (a region of space in which there is no matter in one form or another). Because emptiness in the material world is unnatural and physically impossible. If we imagine a purely hypothetical appearance of such an “absolutely empty (there is no any matter) bubble” in space, then it will immediately collapse (i.e.) be filled with matter in the form of some physical field, or a physical vacuum (with its virtual particles)

  3. Between the electron cloud and the proton, isn't it there !? It should be somewhere because it is not proven otherwise because not everything has been studied and not enough technology is available for everything

  4. This question is like a Zen koan.

    I think that absolute emptiness, like absolute peace, is completely unnatural to this universe and is not part of it. After all, the basic idea of our world is movement. Movement of something.

    Of course, I write this as a being that is clearly made up of matter (energy), not emptiness, so my perspective on this question is fundamentally distorted.

    My consciousness needs some signals to manifest, to be. It needs to work with something, some change, movement relative to something, to create a connection between something. For it to be born, you need at least something to start with. Grain of sand = = > pearl. And you can't make soup with emptiness.

    Well, let's say this (complete absence of anything) exists (whatever that means).

    How do you know that this is a true absolute void, and not a fake?

    What evidence (or lack thereof) will be sufficient for us?

    Maybe it's like being with God – just faith?

    Most likely, this whole paradox is due to the fact that we live in a world of “absolute completeness”)

  5. Yes, the Einstein vacuum exists, but somewhere far away and hopefully not here. Read physics and mathematics, especially about Einstein and Minkowski. Or Google the true and false vacuum, how they differ and how they found out.

    Since Minkowski space is a thing of err… trivial and intuitive, I don't see the point in retelling the original sources.

    Loosely paraphrasing Godel's theorem, there is a point in space that is not filled with anything that could be filled within the existing mathematical model.

Leave a Reply