In the established science, there is no consensus about how space is to be defined. Under different circumstances, it is perceived as a) “Not existence” (absolute nothing), b] Existence and empty (a void), c) Existence effervescing with virtual particles, and by matter occupies space statement also, space is oftentimes understood as d) being fixed and unvarying as if a container.
A rule of Nature states that “resistance to the motion of an existence is mainly depending upon the density of another existence, which exists along the direction of the motion’s force/net force”.
Therefore, an existence (an object or its absence) moves towards coordinates of lesser (or nil) resistance. Emptiness is a cause for less (or nil) resistance to the motion. Hence motion of matter, proves existence of emptiness.
Thus 1) Space is an existence and empty.
This space has its own size/volume. For this reason, matter will not occupy space, rather it displaces space. Therefore, movement of a matter displaces space to another region.
2) Therefore space is not fixed like a container and it is also movable.
Volume of an existence is depending on density of same existence (V=M/D). If density decreases, then the volume of same existence increases. In stars, conversion of matter into energy is continuously going on. For this reason, the density of the universe is decreasing.
3) This decrease in density of universe is a possible reason for the expansion of space.
The scientific world does not have a consensus about the question, “What is space?” Widely different views remain in the world related to space.
l) Some say space is not existence and it is only a notion. Space is empty or it does not contain anything; it is not possible to test or measure space directly. Therefore some people say there is no evidence for space. Hence, they say, “space is nothing -- space is not existence.”
For this view it is relevant to remember scientist and astronomer, Carl Sagan’s statement that "Absence of evidence is not evidence of ABSENCE”. Whereby, emptiness itself is not evidence of space. In science, evidence is necessary in order to critically consider anything under its umbrella. Due to reason of the absence of evidence, some people consider space as both nothing and only a notion.
ll) Some people say space represents an existence and it is filled. In some peoples’ view, space is full of virtual particles at the quantum level, i.e particles that pop in and out of existence, cannot be detected directly but whose existence can be inferred by their physical effects in a vacuum; and they say space is filled with fields - electric, magnetic, gravitational, etc.
lll) Some say space represents an existence (a reality) and it is empty (without matter). Therefore some people say it is an existence that does not contain anything, hence it is empty.
lV) By “matter” definition, space is understood as fixed or constant like a container. Established science's definition of matter says “matter is that which has mass and occupy space”.
By the statement, "matter occupies space,” it is generally understood that space is fixed like a container and matter occupies that container.
But there is no complete consensus about space.
Members of different forums also expressed different opinion about space in "Matter Occupies Space ?" discussion.
But my paper strongly supports to the third view and it is in the way to get consensus about space.
It says space is an existence and it is empty.
(Related to this, I have written main article in wordpress blog www.spaceandconsensus.wordpress.com. After constructive critique by science experts I have modified that paper with perfect testable predictions, formulas and definitions. )
Secondly about motion also, there is no complete consideration of world's existences by scientific community. Because, if a question raised as,
What is required for movement of an existence ? (In case of non inertial motion)
Then, by present science knowledge everyone says FORCE (/net force) is required to move a thing.
Which motion does not require external force, that type movement is called as inertia. According to great scientist Newton, this type movement is a natural phenomena. But he has not given the reason for the question, why it is a natural phenomena?
Because every one only given importance to the force in the movement and no one has not considered the empty space importance in the movement.
If we keenly observed the inertial motion, then we know that, "inertial motion may not required external force for that's motion. But a much low level denser existence must and should exist in the surroundings of moving existence or in the direction of the that inertial movement. Then only inertial motion may possible.
(Less denser existence contains empty space in high extent compared to more denser existence. For example: air and liquid are less denser existences compared to solids.)
Therefore only FORCE is not essential thing, for an existence's movement. With Force, EMPTY SPACE also must and should required for a motion.
In this world, if Force only has existed and Empty space does not exist, then any movement will not takes place. If we do experiment with my prediction (RV1=DV2) then we know about this. From this base I am saying that space is an existence. This space is empty because, speed of any entity through vacuum is greater than any other medium. Because, empty space or vacuum shows nil resistance property for the motion of any high density existence.
And reason for this nil resistance property is nil density of space. This nil density says space is empty. Hence space is an existence and empty.
In this universe possibility of “motion” is a strong evidence to accept space as an existence and it is empty.
Every existence of this universe has its own size/volume. Empty space also has existed in this universe. Therefore it also has its own size/volume. (This size/volume of empty space may be considered by all boundaries of filled existence)
In same time matter also has its own size/volume. Therefore matter always contains or occupies its own size/volume and this size/volume always remains with matter or part of matter, wherever it will moves. Hence it will not occupy another existence, empty space’s size/volume. For this reason space is not fixed or constant like a container. It also displaces from one region to another region by motion of matter.
In this way
1) Space is an existence and it is empty.
2) This space is not fixed or constant like a container. It is also moveable.
But evidence is most important to accept anything or any conclusion as scientific. For this reason, science is the study of natural phenomena with experimental test and observation with reasoning.
By testing established science’s “matter occupies space” statement we will obtain evidence for above conclusions. Therefore we will test the general understanding of “space is fixed like an empty container and matter occupies the space of empty container”.
1) Background of “matter occupies space” understanding:
It is clearly not known that from how many centuries or from how much time, it was understood that "Matter occupies space".
But in general understanding, the region which has not contained anything is called as emptiness or space. For this reason of “emptiness” (or nil density), world is understanding that matter share or cover the size/volume of empty space. But when we consider space as empty, at same time we are ignoring that this emptiness also has its own size or volume, other than matter. For this negligence, it was understood that matter occupies space and space is fixed like a container.
2) Property of space
In this universe every existence has its own property. By possibility of motion in this universe, we have know that space is an existence and empty. As an existence it must and should contain some property. Property is also necessary for identifying and understanding space.
For reason of “emptiness” scientific community has not considered any genuine property for space.
As an existence it has its own property. We will find that. Before finding real property, we try to get property of space by checking correctness of “matter occupy space” phenomena. Because “matter occupies space” phenomena is authentically accepted by scientific community. Where by, it comes in definition of matter.
Matter definition says that “Matter is anything, which has the mass and occupies space”.
This definition says that, “allowing itself to matter for occupying” is one of property space. As per present science, if matter has the property occupying space,
then space also allow itself, to matter, for occupying. (Inverse of matter property, vice versa.)
If really, matter occupies space then it will give one property of space. So first we check the matter occupies space or not.
For explaining the term “matter occupies space” every explainer uses an empty container as space and liquid (or solid) as matter. To demonstrate matter occupies space, they pour the liquid (or put the solid) into the container. By this process they say liquid or solid has occupied the space of empty container. This explanation indirectly says the property of empty space.
i.e. Space also allows itself to matter for occupying.
This is also inverse statement of “matter occupies space” statement. i.e. If matter occupy space then space also allows, itself to matter for occupying.
As per established science’s authentic definition of matter, it is the property of space and by testing statement; we are indirectly testing this property of space.
3) Testing established science statement :
Science is the study of natural phenomena with experimental test and observation with reasoning. Therefore first we will test the established science’s “matter occupies space” statement.
Established science says that matter occupies space. To test this, we do simple experiment.
In below figures, it is assumed that in 'Z' region pure empty space has existed. 'A' and 'B' are solid (rocks) existed in 'E' and 'F' region.
According to established science empty space has the property of allowing itself to matter, for occupying.
(Because, as per established science one of the property of matter is "occupying space". Then space property will become, allowing itself to matter, for occupying.)
Therefore, when we place 'A' solid in 'Z' region, defender of established science, says that 'Z' region's empty space has occupied 'A' solid in it.
Hence they say empty space and 'A' solid both have existed in same Z region.
As per their argument, if empty space has existed in same ‘Z’ region, then it must and should have "lets itself to be occupied by matter" property in it.
To test this, we try to put ‘B’ solid in same ‘Z’ region.
But it is not possible to put ‘B’ solid in same ‘Z’ region (where already ‘A’ solid has existed).
Now we observe this phenomena with reasoning.
3.1)Observation of these tests with reasoning:
This phenomenon also will defend by defender of established science by following statement.
By above statement defender of main stream science, differentiate space into
1) Occupied space
2) Unoccupied space.
In their view "occupied space" means 'A' solid existed ‘Z’ region and they thinks in same Z region empty space also has existed.
If we accept 'A' solid region as occupied space and empty space also has existed in same Z region then,
We can not say, space as empty. Because 'A' solid is not empty.
Also, here we are not seeing space and matter as different existences. Here defender of established science is calling only one existence, with two names. One as name of "occupied space" and another by name of 'A' solid.
It says that space and matter are both same existence and there is no difference in between them.
Secondly, when 'B' solid has not takes the place of same Z region, they defend this phenomenon as
When Z region will be unoccupied, then it will occupy B solid.”
Here we have to think that,if any entity has any property, then that property must and should remain with that entity, in all conditions.
When B solid not takes the place of Z region (after putting A solid in it), then also if we accept space till existed in Z region. Then it implies that Z region space does not contain any property.
But it is not scientific that considering an existence without any property
Because we identify the existences on the base of their property. If we consider anything as an existence then it must and should contain some property and that property should remain same with that entity, in all conditions .
Therefore it is impossible to exist, any entity without any property.
If we consider space as an existence and it has "allowing itself to matter for occupying" property then it has not existed in ‘Z’ region, after putting ‘A’ solid in it.
Now we observe above tests with the definition of existence.
3.2) Observing above tests with definitions of existences :
In this universe only existence has existed that is distributed in two types.
Those are 1) Filled existence and
2) Empty existence
First we know what is the existence? and how can we differentiate two existences?
Existence: Existence is the size or volume. It contains same average density.
Differentiation of existences: In a considered volume, if difference in average density has existed, then they are separate existences.
Definition of two type of existences.
Empty existence: It is a size or volume. It contains same zero average density.
Filled existence: It is a size or volume. It contains same greater than zero density.
Note: As per these definitions size or volume is common property both existences.
But in this article "Filled existence" term is used instead of matter and "Empty existence" term, has used instead of space.
Because, established science, consider matter and energy separately. These have separate definitions. But in this article all existences of the world has observed by density of existences. Therefore greater than zero density existence, has not differentiated separately as matter and energy. Here every size, which has greater than zero density, is considered only as filled existence. For this reason, instead of matter "Filled existence" term is used.
Secondly “Space” word is commonly used for different things. This word is used for empty space, filled space and also for sky, cosmic region.
But by “empty existence” term we will not get any confusion in the meaning. To understand it, definition has given that “it is size or volume, which contain same zero average density.”
And in this article, inside the matter also, filled existence and empty existence are considered. (Inter molecular space of matter has considered as empty existence and particle of matter as filled existence.)
Hence in this article new terms are used as "Filled existence" (Fv) and "Empty existence" (Ev) instead of "Matter" and "Space".
According to these definitions, it is not possible to say, space has existed in same ‘Z’ region even after putting 'A' solid in it.
Because solids always have average density, greater than zero and the pure empty space has zero average density.
And, Greater than zero average density ≠ zero average density.
Hence empty space (containing zero average density) has not existed in ‘Z’ region, after putting 'A' solid in it.
Now we observe above tests with my predictions.
3.3) Observing above tests with predictions :
My first prediction also does not allow to say, space has existed in same ‘Z’ region (even after putting 'A'solid in it).
My first prediction say's that,
"Resistance to movement of an existence is mainly depending on another existence density, which has existed in the direction of force or net force."
(Resistance to a movement is mainly depending on differences in between two existences density.)
According to this prediction, if space has existed in ‘Z’ region, then it (space) must not show any resistance for B solids movement into ‘Z’ region.
Because space is nil density existence or empty. Therefore it contain nil resistance property for motion. That’s why, it does not shows any opposition to the ‘B’ solid’s motion.
But ‘B’ solid has faced high resistance, when we tried to put it in ‘Z’ region. These observations says that empty space has not existed in Z region, (after putting A solid in it).
Therefore only 'A' solid has existed in ‘Z’ region.
Existence of only 'A' solid in ‘Z’ region is indication of displacement of empty space from ‘Z’ region.
My second prediction is based on this natural phenomena, that says
"Every movement of an existence is depending on displacement of another existence, which has existed in the direction of force or net force".
"An existence speed will be greater than zero, if and only, if it is capable to displace another existence which has existed in the direction of force or net force."
It may be inertial motion or non inertial motion, but this rule is common for both motions.
When we tried to put ‘A’ solid in ‘Z’ region. Then it entered into ‘Z’ region. But ‘B’ solid has not entered into ‘Z’ region.
(In other way ‘A’ solid’s speed is greater than zero and ‘B’ solid does not have greater than zero speed, while entering into ‘Z’ region.)
By this we observe that , ‘A’ solid capable to displace empty space of ‘Z’ region . Hence it entered into ‘Z’ region and empty space displaced to another region.
Mean while 'B' solid has not entered into 'Z' region. Because it is incapable to displace 'A' solid, Which has previously existed in Z region. Therefore it has not moved into the ‘Z’ region.
These observations says that every motion is depending on another existence’s displacement, which has existed in the direction of force or net force.
For perfect understanding, we can test this prediction by putting 'A' solid on water of a container. When we place solid on the water, then the solid (more denser existence) enters into the container by displacing the water (less denser existence).
In these both examples, displaced things are same relative less density existences and moving thing is relative more density existence.
These observations clearly says that, movement of more denser existence will displace less denser existence.
And generally it has observed that, less denser existence displaced by movement of high denser existence.
Empty space has always zero average density. Therefore, by movement of more denser existence, it can be easily displaced to another region.
Hence it is impossible to occupy it by any matter (or by more denser existence).
Observation of above tests with predictions also, we come to know that
"Filled existence does not occupy empty existence" OR "Matter does not occupy space" and space is not fixed or not constant like a container. It is also movable.
Now we observe above test with formulas.
3.4) Observing above tests with formulas:
l) V=Ev+Fv (An existence formula)
This is formula for volume of an existence.
Here, V = total volume of an existence,
Ev = volume of empty existence,
Fv = volume of filled existence,
Note: Every matter has contained “Ev” as intermolecular space and “Fv” as particle of that matter. In case of pure empty space “Fv” (filled existence) is zero.
i.e. V=Ev +0. (We will confirm correctness of this formula by second formula.)
ll) RV1=DV2 (Evidence for space formula or formula of inertia)
This is formula for first prediction “Resistance to the movement of an existence is mainly depending on another existence density, which has existed in the direction of force or net force”.
Here, RV1= Resistance to motion of first existence (V1).
DV2= Density of another existence (V2).
(Condition: V2 is must be rest position or relatively less moving, compared to the V1. Because it is perfect formula for inertia.)
lll) mV1=SV2 (Formula which proves space displacement)
This is formula for second prediction “Every movement of an existence is depending on displacement of another existence, which has existed in the direction of force or net force”.
Here, mV1= movement of volume of first existence (V1).
SV2= displacement of volume of another existence (V2).
Now we apply these formulas to above, Z region empty space, A solid, B solid experiment.
3.4.1) In first step ‘A’ solid placed in the ‘Z’ region empty space. For this step ‘A’ solid is V1 and empty space is V2.
a) By RV1=DV2 formula, we know that V1 or ‘A’ solid moved into ‘Z’ region because, V2 or empty space's density is nil.
This observation says that an existence motion is mainly depending on another existence density.
i.e. if another existence V2, has nil density or low level density, then first existence V1, will not face any resistance or face less resistance for motion.
b] From mV1=SV2 formula, we know that, by movement of V1 (or ‘A’ solid), V2 (or empty space) of ‘Z’ region displaced to another region.
This observation says that an existence motion is depending on another existence displacement.
i.e. if another existence V2, is displaced then first existence V1, will move.
3.4.2) In second step, we tried to put ‘B’ solid in Z region. For this step ‘B’ solid is V1 and ‘A’ solid existed in ‘Z’ region is V2.
a) For this second step, by RV1=DV2 formula, we know that V1 or ‘B’ solid has not moved into ‘Z’ region because, V2 or ‘A’ solids density is high, (if we compare A solid density with empty existence).
This phenomenon also says that an existence motion is mainly depending on another existence density.
i.e. if another existence V2, has high density then first existence V1,will face high resistance.
b] For this second step, by mV1=SV2 formula we know that V2 or ‘A’ solid of ‘Z’ region has not displaced to other region, therefore V1 or ‘B’ solid has not entered into ‘Z’ region.
This phenomenon also says that an existence motion is depending on another existence displacement.
i.e. if another existence V2 has not displaced then first existence V1 will not move.
By these formulas also we have known that
"Filled existence does not occupy empty existence" OR "Matter does not occupy space" and space is not fixed or not constant like a container. It is also moveable.
In introduction and this proof of “matter does not occupy space” we already have got evidence for the view “space is an existence and it is empty”. Now we see this evidence in particular.
4) Evidence for view “space is an existence and it is empty”:
“Space is an existence and it is empty” is not a research of this article. But this article is trying to get consensus for this view from scientific community, by giving evidences.
Previously scientists have not got evidence for space. Therefore different people have said different things about the space. In introduction we have already known fallowing views.
1) Space is nothing or not existence.
2) Space is existence. But it is filled.
3) Space is existence and it is empty.
4.1) Space is not “nothing” or not “not existence”: Empty existence’s size/volume and motion of existence proves space is not “nothing” (or not “not existence”).
a) Evidence of size/volume:
We call nothing, if anything equal to zero. Therefore “zero” is only nothing or not existence.
By definition of the “existence”, we already know that “size/volume” is common and main property of the every existence. In the region of empty space, density may be equal to zero. But size or volume of empty space is not equal to zero. Therefore space is not “nothing” or not “not existence”.
Now we know space is an existence by “existence formula”.
An existence formula is V=Ev+Fv.
In empty space ‘Fv’ (density) may equal to zero (Fv=0) but ‘Ev’ does not equal to zero (Ev ≠ 0). i.e. V=Ev+0
For this reason, whole V does not equal to nothing (V ≠ 0).
If V=0 then only it may be said as nothing or not existence. But, in case of empty space V ≠ 0.
Hence empty existence is not a nothing or not “Not existence”. It is also an existence.
b] Evidence of motion:
In introduction of the article, by “inertia” example we have known that, only force is not essential requirement for motion of an existence. With force empty space also must and should required to move a thing.
Because, if anything face “resistance” then that will not move and every filled existence shows resistance to the movement. Therefore “some not opposing” existence is necessary to move a thing.
We have confirmed it, by ‘Z’ region ‘A’, ‘B’ solid experiment.
i.e. While we placed ‘A’ solid in ‘Z’ region then it takes the place of ‘Z’ region. But ‘B’ solid does not take the place of same ‘Z’ region.
Because, in this universe there is a rule. i.e. Resistance to motion of an existence is mainly depending on density of another existence, which has existed in the direction of force or net force.
This rule also says that “some not opposing” existence should be essential to move a thing. In this universe motion is taking place means “some not opposing” existence has existed. Motion is main evidence for the existence of space. Therefore “space” has existed and it is an existence.
4.2) Space is not filled existence:
Suppose empty existence or space is completely filled with something, then it will not have “nil resistance” property for motion.
Space shows nil resistance property for motion means, it is not filled. It is empty.
For nil resistance property or for emptiness, we will get evidence by the formula RV1=DV2.
This formula says that, if density of V2 is high then V1 will face high resistance.
if density of V2 is less then V1 will face less resistance.
if density of V2 is nil then V1 will face nil resistance.
In this way, in the experiments if it is found that V1 is not facing any resistance in the motion, then it is understood that empty space has existed in the direction of V1’s motion.
4.3)Evidence for existence of empty space in matter:
Basically RV1=DV2 is perfect formula for inertia. It may be used to know different density of V2. Therefore by RV1=DV2 formula we also get evidence for empty space, which has existed inside the matters. In test, V1 and force applied on V1 to be same. But its speed will be observed on different V2 of same quantity and same content.
For example: Let take V1 as an iron ball and take V2 as different states of matters of same content and same quantity.
(We may take V2 as ice, water and steam. Because these are different states of same content H2O.)
If we moved V1 through different V2 of same content like H2O (i.e. ice, water and steam) then iron ball speed through these states of matter will be different; even though these three states of matter contain same content of H2O.
If we think reason for different speed, then we will know that existence of ‘empty space’ in these matters is the main reason for different speed.
Because “resistance to motion of an existence (V1) is mainly depending on another existence (V2) density”.
i.e. As Density >, Resistance > and as Density <, Resistance <.
Content same, quantity same but speed of iron ball is different means, some “not opposing” empty existence has existed in the matters. Because empty existence does not oppose any motion.
Not opposition proves the emptiness or nil density of that existence. Therefore space is not filled.
It is an existence and it is empty.
Scientist Carl sagan was stated that “emptiness” itself is not an evidence for space (Absence is not an evidence of ABSENCE). His statement may be true up to earlier time.
But now we have got evidence for empty space by RV1=DV2 formula. Therefore space is not nothing. It is an existence and it is empty.
Hence we may state that space is not with ABSENSE OF EVIDENCE. Else it has evidence. Those are,
1) Size or volume of emptiness
2) Possibility of motion. In particular “Nil resistance property” for motion
Note: In above example of iron ball, we have also checked the correctness of V=Ev+Fv formula by RV1=DV2 formula. i.e. Matter has contained both empty existence and filled existence.
In these tests and observations we observed the size or volume as common property of empty space and matter. This observation is results to discover the reason for expansion of space.
Science has got evidence for expansion of space. But it is believed that dark energy / dark matter is responsible for expansion of space. But till now we have not got evidence for existence of dark energy and dark matter.
Other than dark energy / dark matter this article is giving another reason for expansion of space.
In the tests and observations we have observed the size or volume as common property of every existence. This size/volume is depending on density of same existence.
i.e. If any existence has high density then that existence’s volume is smaller; compared to same existence having low density.
We will get proof for this phenomenon from established science density formula.
i.e. Density = Mass / Volume, then
Volume = Mass / Density.
If we assume mass as a fixed quantity. Then this relation says that, as density decreases, volume increases.
(Suppose mass is some fixed quantity, then in the formula V=M/D
as D <, then automatically V >)
This observation is results to discover the reason for expansion of space.
i.e. Conversion of more denser existence, into less denser existence Or conversion of matter into energy. In stars naturally this process is continuously going on.
By this process universe density is decreasing. Hence automatically volume of this universe is increasing. This is the phenomenon of expansion of space.
Therefore, increase in volume of universe is directly proportional “decrease in density of whole universe existences” (OR directly proportional to “converted matter into energy” ).
Experimental tests and observations with density relation (D=M/V) says this is only the reason for expansion of space.
Fallowed is the perfect formula for expansion of space.
Formula for expansion of space reason:
The formula V=M/D gives hint to reason for expansion of space.
But this only formula for existences, which has contain density. In this universe other than mass or filled existence, empty existence also has existed.
Therefore formula for total volume of universe is,
Vu =Ev+V or Vu=Vo+V
Vu= Volume of universe.
Ev =Vo= empty existence (Vo indicates that Fv is zero in V. i.e. V=Ev+0)
V = Volume of existence.
By substituting V=M/D in volume of universe formula, we will get reason for expansion of space formula. i.e.
Vu = Ev + M/D or Vu = Vo + M/D
This is the perfect formula for reason for expansion of space.
In this formula as D decreases total volume V increases. Same this process is running naturally in the world. That is conversion of matter into energy, in the stars. Hence it is the main reason for expansion of space.
:Nothing has never existed in this universe (Prem Parvathi Principle):
Previous to this article I was written a metaphysical theory named "Prem Parvathi Principle theory". From this principle I have got perfection about the idea, space is not nothing (space is not, not existence). This principle states that "nothing has never existed in this universe". At that time I was given meaning of "nothing" as
"The existence which has never existed at past.
The existence which is not existed now.
The existence which will never exist in future also." is the real nothing.
Other than this "nothing" everything, which has existed is the existence. Therefore space also an existence.
Now this principle is saying in terms of formula mathematically.
i.e.By V=Ev+Fv formula, we are aware that empty space is also not nothing. Because Ev also contain some size/volume. Therefore, in case of empty space, total V does not equal to zero.
If anything is equal to zero then that may be called as nothing. According to existence formula (V=Ev+Fv) Empty space is not nothing. In this universe other than empty space also we can’t find any other “nothing” (by V=Ev+Fv formula). Because the existence, which has existed in the universe is compulsory contain some size/volume. Therefore it is impossible to exist any “nothing” in this universe.
Hence, we may come to the conclusion that “Nothing has never existed in this universe” (It is named as P.P.Principle).
Nothing has never existed in the universe. Therefore zero and below zero size existences are not existed in this universe. Hence "nothing" means zero or below zero size existences and this nothing has never existed at any time.
Hence space is not nothing or not existence. For this reason I request to the readers that please don't call the space as "nothing". Because by Prem Parvathi Principle it will give meaning of all time not existence or zero/below zero size existence.
While space may be of zero density existence. But it is not zero or below zero size existence. For this reason please don't call space by the word "nothing" or not existence.
This thing also tells a major difference in between science and mathematics.
That is science is the study of only existences. But mathematics is study of both existences and not existences. Because mathematics has contained both positive and negative numerals. (+1+2+3+……..and -1-2-3-……….).
It says that all mathematics is not the SCIENCE.
It may be inertial motion or non inertial motion but empty space is one of the essential entity for motion. In inertial motion it is the primary requirement of that motion. In this universe movement is taking place means empty space has existed. Because, resistance to the movement is mainly depending on another existence density, which has existed in the direction of force or net force.
If another existence density is high then that strongly oppose the motion. Then movement will not takes place.
But empty space is a nil density existence. Hence it does not show any opposition to the movement. Therefore empty space existed in the direction of force or net force, is the reason for the motion of filled existence.
If anything is moving in a direction then it implies, empty space has existed in that direction in a small extent or in high extent.
This empty space has a specific size or volume and matter also has it’s own volume or size. For this reason, when we place matter in empty space region, it will not occupy the empty space. Instead space will be displaced to another region.
Therefore, matter does not occupy the space.
Filled existence does not occupy empty existence.
a) Space may essential for forming of different types of matter. For example: ICE, WATER, AIR.
b. Space may necessary for motion of an filled existence.
But space is not necessary for ‘survival’ of matter or filled existence. Filled existence is not dependent of space. Without space also filled existence will be existed.
1) Space is not fixed like a container. It can be displaced to another region by motion of high density existence.
2) Filled existence and empty existences are separate existences and space is not essential entity for survival of matter or filled existence.
(This article modified with formulas in july 2012)
After reading this also, if anyone says that matter occupies empty space. Then first they have to answer my questions.
1) What is the space ? Is it empty or filled?
2) With force, what is essential requirement for the movement of an existence?
3) What is the property of the space? show that property by any experiments. Please note that, that property must and should remain same in all conditions.
4) If you defend space till existed in 'Z' region even after putting A solid in it. Then please answer,
a) Does Greater than zero average density = zero average density ?
b. If space has existed in Z region (even after putting
A solid in it) Then why it has shown high resistance to B solid's movement, towards Z region?
(Because in reality and according to my paper it has nil resistance property for motion. Since it is empty.)
c) If you say space does not contain any property then, In this universe, Does any existence has existed without any property? if existed give any example or please show me that entity.
This article is reviewed by "facebook" science group in July 2012. Here is link for this.
Source: Matter Occupies Space ?
©2012, All copyright reserved of author S. G. CHIMMANCHODKER SEDAM
It is prohibited by the law of sharing content of the article for commercial use; without prior permission of Author.
4 Comments On This Entry
Trackbacks for this entry [ Trackback URL ]
Matter Does Not Occupy Space
on May 01 2012 07:33 AM
From: Do You Think Law Of Conservation Has Limitations ?
on Sep 05 2011 09:54 AM
on May 02 2012 09:52 AM
Matter Does Not Occupy Space
Aman Shah on Apr 09 2012 06:18 AM
From: Do You Think Law Of Conservation Has Limitations ?
0 user(s) viewing
0 anonymous member(s)