Thread 16742467

Are atoms really 99.9% empty space, and if so, how does this not contradict the Buddhist doctrine of Śūnyatā (reality is empty)?

>how does this not contradict the Buddhist doctrine of Śūnyatā (reality is empty)?
Where's the contradiction?

Imo these senses of emptiness have nothing to do with each other, but even monks like to conflate them, especially when speaking to a lay audience.

>>16742467 (OP)
Are humans really smart, and if so, how does this not contradict OP being a retarded faggot?

"empty space" =/= nothing

>>16742467 (OP)
every component particle of an atom is literaly described as a point, they have no volume. Empty space is 100% of the volume of an atom, not 99.9%

>>16742757
every component particle of an atom is literally described as a wave

>>16742467 (OP)
The fact there's matter at all is a contradiction. I think your thread sucks.

>>16742759
The wave is an abstraction of the chance of finding the point.

>>16742467 (OP)
Because nothing is, well, nothing. You still have 0.1% of something, so you do have something.
Also what's Democritus got to do with Buddhism? He was an ancient Greek pagan with a primitive atomic theory. You have the atoms and you have the void, which the atoms move into. For Democritus, you can't keep dividing matter forever because this causes problems (an infinite series) so eventually you must must reach a level where you cannot divide any further. These are the indestructible atoms.

>>16742759
>literally described as a wave
A wave of probability, of finding the POINT where the POINT PARTICLE is located

>>16742757
This is bullshit. How can matter have volume when the individual atoms matter is made up have 0 volume? You can't go from nothing to something.

>>16742975
Matter doesnt have a volume, theres electric interactions that happen at a distance tho, when you feel the push thats not indicative of some volume but just of an electric force

>>16742493
>Tries to make an argument for no self
>Article begins with "I have heard...
>Main thesis is that "He said..."
What a waste of text.

>>16742759
The entire collection of spacetime points of the atom as a whole can described as a wave, not the individual points.

>>16742706
Completely empty space is just a field of nothing, so its nothing spread over an empty array of nothing, its like expanding {0} to {0,0,0} for the sake of modeling nothing in a certain context, its still nothing just spread out over the context of a field.

>>16743075
>as a whole can described as a wave,
Kill yourself retard

>>16742975
>You can't go from nothing to something.
0!=1, the is a specific function specifically outlining how every unit is a function of nothing because nothing is something.

Also consider that while 0=0, (0==0)=1 that is to say 0.equals(0)=1 and when you mix that in with all the domains where 0^0=1, its obviously that nothing is something and other things can result from functions of pure nothingness and nothing is itself an incredibly important logical and arithmetic element that has its own symbols.

>>16743084
I might have to finish my physics postdoc and also get a math doctorate before I can comprehend that level of complexity of counterargument, thanks for setting the bar so high, now I have something to work toward.

>>16742467 (OP)
>pic
were the greeks aliens? how did they know so much?

>>16742467 (OP)
Depends on your definition of empty

>>16743140
OP clearly provided his definition of empty as empty space.

>>16742467 (OP)
Isn't a mix of 99.99% blood 0.01% cyanide coursing through your veins exactly the same as 100% blood?

>>16743196
So nothingness is the life blood of the universe and only .01% of the material universe is something else?

>>16743094
Most of the development of this was done by the Romans.

>Titus Lucretius Carus (/ˈtaJtəs luːˈkriːʃəs/ TY-təs loo-KREE-shəs; Latin: [ˈtitus luˈkreːti.us ˈkaːrus]; c.99 – October 15, 55 BC) was a Roman poet and philosopher. His only known work is the philosophical poem De rerum natura, a didactic work about the tenets and philosophy of Epicureanism, which usually is translated into English as On the Nature of Things—and somewhat less often as On the Nature of the Universe

>De rerum natura was a considerable influence on the Augustan poets, particularly Virgil (in his Aeneid and Georgics, and to a lesser extent on the Eclogues) and Horace.he work was almost lost during the Middle Ages, but was rediscovered in 1417 in a monastery in Germany by Poggio Bracciolini

>>Greenblatt tells the story of how Poggio Bracciolini, a 15th-century papal emissary and obsessive book hunter, saved the last copy of the Roman poet Lucretius's On the Nature of Things from near-terminal neglect in a German monastery, thus reintroducing important ideas that sparked the modern age

>It played an important role both in the development of atomism (Lucretius was an important influence on Pierre Gassendi) and the efforts of various figures of the Enlightenment era to construct a new Christian humanism

>To prove this position he called upon the atomism of Democritus, so as to demonstrate that the material universe was formed not by a Supreme Being, but by the mixing of elemental particles that had existed from all eternity governed by certain simple laws. Lucretius' task was to clearly state and fully develop these views in an attractive form; his work was an attempt to show that everything in nature can be explained by natural laws, without the need for the intervention of divine beings

>>16744371
>Lucretius identifies the supernatural with the notion that the deities created our world or interfere with its operations in some way. He argues against fear of such deities by demonstrating, through observations and arguments, that the operations of the world can be accounted for in terms of natural phenomena. These phenomena are the regular, but purposeless motions and interactions of tiny atoms in empty space. Meanwhile, he argues against the fear of death by stating that death is the dissipation of a being's material mind

>Lucretius uses the analogy of a vessel, stating that the physical body is the vessel that holds both the mind (mens) and spirit (anima) of a human being. Neither the mind nor spirit can survive independent of the body. Thus Lucretius states that once the vessel (the body) shatters (dies) its contents (mind and spirit) can no longer exist. So, as a simple ceasing-to-be, death can be neither good nor bad for this being. Being completely devoid of sensation and thought, a dead person cannot miss being alive

>According to Lucretius, fear of death is a projection of terrors experienced in life, of pain that only a living (intact) mind can feel. Lucretius also puts forward the 'symmetry argument' against the fear of death. In it, he says that people who fear the prospect of eternal non-existence after death should think back to the eternity of non-existence before their birth, which probably did not cause them much suffering

>>16742759
kys