From this, the empty set, nothing:
{ }
to this, a lot of something:
(Credit: NASA; ESA ; G.
Illingworth, D. Magee, and P. Oesch, University of California,
Santa Cruz; R.
Bouwens, Leiden University; and the HUDF09 Team)
by Robert Lawrence Kuhn
eSkeptic, August 28, 2013
I have read this essay twice. The following excerpts make
very little sense to me and seem like woo. The only way I can understand what
is being said is if I substitute a different word for "nothing," such
as "reality." Even then I have difficulty understanding or accepting
what the author is trying to communicate. I have put my specific reactions in
brackets after each excerpt.
What the author is calling "nothing" really isn't a space, state of existence, or condition with no thing. In his purported nine levels of nothing, for example, only the ninth can truly be said to have no thing. The other eight have things and therefore are really not nothing.
What the author is calling "nothing" really isn't a space, state of existence, or condition with no thing. In his purported nine levels of nothing, for example, only the ninth can truly be said to have no thing. The other eight have things and therefore are really not nothing.