NOTHING, AND WHY THE QUESTION "WHY IS THERE SOMETHING AS OPPOSED TO NOTHING?" IS UNANSWERABLE

[Age]

When have I EVER said or stated that space is a physical thing

You said that space is a thing

Yes, true.

so if you do not think it is physical then it must be non physical

I asked a clarifying question. Instead of just answering the ACTUAL question, you make up an ASSUMPTION INSTEAD, then this leads to a completely an unnecessary waste of "mental energy". Do not feel alone though. Most of 'you', adult human beings, have this same WRONG reactive behavior when a question is posed to you.

WHY do 'you', adult human beings, continually PRESUME some thing is being said just because a clarifying question is being asked of you, or some thing else is being said/stated?

For example, if I say; "Space is a thing", then HOW does this instantly transfer into mean "space IS a physical thing"?

The ANSWER to these two just asked clarifying question really IS very simple and easy indeed. In other words, What are the things that make 'you' SEE and VIEW things WRONGLY and from a CLOSED perspective? Or, in another way, What are the things that PREVENT and STOP 'you' from SEEING and VIEWING thee actual REAL Truth of things? BOTH of the two things in the answer apply to BOTH questions here.

Just to make it ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, when I ask a clarifying question, then the question is coming from a Truly OPEN, wondering AND inquisitive perspective. Although I might ALREADY KNOW what the actual True, Right, and Correct Answer IS, I am STILL wondering what answer WILL BE provided. Until that is given, I am left wondering, while remaining completely OPEN.

Firstly, just because I either think some thing, or do not think some thing, this does NOT make any thing SO.

For example, If I do not think space is physical, then that has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on whether space IS physical or non physical.

The "logic" IF I (or anyone) does not think space is physical, THEN space is non physical, is just plain WRONG, and ILLOGICAL.

Secondly, I NEITHER think space is physical NOR non physical. I SEE 'space' as the distance between two visibly physical separated things.

now So do you think space is a non physical thing and if so then how can it actually exist in reality

I think 'space' could be a physical and/or a non physical thing.

If 'space', however, is a non physical thing, then space CAN, and DOES, actually exist in reality either through the way I describe space as just being a distance, or, as being like a non-physical, unobtrusive thing IS, which would HAVE TO some how exist, BECAUSE physical things would NOT be able to move freely about, like they do, if physical things were NOT separated some how.

For example, IF it is possible to collide an electron with a proton, then there NEEDS to be some thing separating the two, and that some thing would have to be as close to be non physical like to ALLOW the electron AND the proton to be separated AND be able to move freely towards each other, in order to collide. Obviously, IF there were physical things between them, then they would NOT touch either, nor collide together. Unless of course they demolish completely the other physical thing.

Now, IF inside a proton there is three separate physically hard cores, known as 'quarks', then what is there between and around these three quarks that separates them into being three separate physical things? If what separates them are physical things, then what are they? And/or if that space in between and around the three quarks, which is what separates the quarks is 'space', then how could that 'space' be physical?

In 'Reality' physical things move about freely bumping into and off of other physical things. For this to happen, then this could indict that a non physical thing exists, which is just what separates the physical things from each other and IS what ALLOWS 'freedom of movement'. Obviously, without 'freedom of movement', then there would be NO change. If there was NO change, then 'Reality' would NOT exist HERE-NOW as It does, and ALWAYS WILL.

By the way, preexisting ASSUMPTIONS about how that EVERY thing that exists HAS TO BE physical, does NOT help in being able to SEE and ACCEPT what I have been 'trying to' say and explain here.

In fact ANY PRESUMPTIONS and/or BELIEFS do NOT help ANY one in SEEING what thee actual REAL Truth of things ARE.

[Age]

Is it possible for a word to refer to NOT a thing now

Things are classed as physical while thoughts for example are classed as mental
Things that are classed as mental are regarded as being essentially non physical

Okay, great. So, is it agreed that things that are classed as being essentially non physical DO EXIST in this Existence, which is some times also known as Reality?

If yes, then this answers your previous question and is exactly HOW non physical things CAN exist in Reality.

By the way, WHY, when you quote me by rewriting what I have written, do 'you' add the word "now" in, but NOT the actual question mark that I have used?

[Age]

No more answers to your questions here as I do not have the mental energy for any more

But 'you' had the so called "mental energy" to ask me clarifying questions. If 'you' keep asking clarifying questions, then this might lead to and achieve the outcome being sort here.

[surreptitious57]

But do you have ANY actual EVIDENCE and PROOF for what you just THINK is true

Can you back up and support WHOLLY and FULLY what you THINK is true

No I do not have any actual PROOF for what I just think is true
So I cannot back it up and support it WHOLLY and FULLY at all

[surreptitious57]

Firstly just because I either think some thing or do not think some thing this does NOT make any thing SO

This is true for me as well unless I have actual PROOF to demonstrate that what I say is demonstrably true
But I have no actual PROOF in this thread as far as I know and therefore what I think is true could be false

[surreptitious57]

So is it agreed that things that are classed as being essentially non physical DO EXIST in this Existence which is some times also known as Reality

Things that are classed as non physical certainly exist although whether they are truly non physical is another matter entirely
The terms physical and non physical are human terms but that distinction may not necessarily be true in any objective sense

[surreptitious57]

If you keep asking clarifying questions then this might lead to and achieve the outcome being sort here

What is the outcome being sort here and is that from your perspective or mine
I am simply here in the forum but do you have any other reason for being here

[surreptitious57]

physical things move about freely bumping into and off of other physical things

Do physical things actually bump into and off each other or does electron repulsion instead stop this from happening in reality
Is it not possible that when you touch something you are just feeling the electron repulsion between the object and your body

[Impenitent]

...nothing up my sleeve...

-Imp

[Age]

But do you have ANY actual EVIDENCE and PROOF for what you just THINK is true

Can you back up and support WHOLLY and FULLY what you THINK is true

No I do not have any actual PROOF for what I just think is true
So I cannot back it up and support it WHOLLY and FULLY at all

Okay, and just a suggestion, it helps TREMENDOUSLY when 'one' does have the actual EVIDENCE and PROOF first, to back up and support what they say and/or claim is true, right, and correct.

[Age]

Firstly just because I either think some thing or do not think some thing this does NOT make any thing SO

This is true for me as well unless I have actual PROOF to demonstrate that what I say is demonstrably true
But I have no actual PROOF in this thread as far as I know and therefore what I think is true could be false

Okay, but now I am curious as to WHY then present any thing, without actual PROOF?

[Age]

So is it agreed that things that are classed as being essentially non physical DO EXIST in this Existence which is some times also known as Reality

Things that are classed as non physical certainly exist although whether they are truly non physical is another matter entirely

This is good to now know, because I was pretty sure previously that 'you' were insisting that ALL things must be physical.

But if we are in agreement that there are things classed as non physical, and that they do certainly exist, then we can carry on and discuss whether the 'space', between two quarks, which is just the distance that separates quarks, is made up of any thing physical or if it could be just a non physical space, or distance?

The terms physical and non physical are human terms but that distinction may not necessarily be true in any objective sense

Any and absolutely ALL terms are ALL human being's terms, but that does not necessarily mean that any of those terms are true, right, nor correct terms, in the only one objective sense, at all either.

But what I do know is; That what IS absolutely True, Right, and Correct can be found, discovered, learned, and taught, in a Truly Objective sense, when LOOKING FROM a Truly OPEN perspective.

[Age]

If you keep asking clarifying questions then this might lead to and achieve the outcome being sort here

What is the outcome being sort here and is that from your perspective or mine

What the outcome is, all depends, because absolutely EVERY thing is relative to the observer, then what the outcome is being sort here is depended solely upon the observer, or the 'you'.

What the outcome being sort here is, from your perspective, 'we' will know if, and when, 'you' tell us thee Truth.

What the outcome being sort here is, from my perspective, hopefully, is already known. But if not, then just let me know, and I will tell, if interested.

I am simply here in the forum but do you have any other reason for being here

Okay.

If the outcome is to just simply be here, then just asking clarifying questions, which then lead to fulfilling answers, which satisfies a thirst or a quench to learn more or satisfies just for being here, then asking clarifying questions might lead to just being simply here, which was the outcome being sort or wanted.

Obviously one would NOT be here if they simply did NOT want to be or if the outcome was to NOT simply be here.

[surreptitious57]

if we are in agreement that there are things classed as non physical and that they do certainly exist then we can carry on and discuss whether the space between two quarks which is just the distance that separates quarks is made up of any thing physical or if it could just be a non physical space or distance

I do not know if the space between quarks is truly non physical or if there are smaller particles between them that have yet to be discovered
All that can currently be said is that there is no evidence for anything between them and that would be true though it may only true for now

There was a time when quarks were not known to exist but that knowledge was only true for then
And so when quarks were discovered that knowledge had to be updated to allow for the discovery

Any time a statement pertaining to science is made relating to something not existing or not being possible it is only true at the time
So it does not automatically mean that it is absolutely true because at any given point in the future new evidence may be discovered
It could be absolutely true but there is no way of knowing that so either way one can only go on the available knowledge at the time

[surreptitious57]

I am curious as to WHY then present any thing without actual PROOF [ OR EVIDENCE ]

One can actually think that something is true without having to provide evidence or proof for it at all
It is only when one makes an actual truth claim that said claim has to be demonstrated in some way