What is nothing? Though at first, the response may seem like little more than a play on words, the simple answer is this: Nothing is not. No word such as anything or everything can be added at the end of the statement to further clarify the crucial concept, which is non-existence: the dictionary definition of nothing. In actuality, though, although the denotation of "nothing" insists on absolute absence and void, in today’s society "nothing" is actually quite present, masquerading as something indeed.
Of course, there are concepts in existence that accurately represent our limited understanding of nothing. One such concept is zero. In a simple counting sense, when one, two, or eight hundred items could be present, but there aren’t any, there are zero. Zero items are present, and nothing is there.
Kept strictly in a counting sense, this works. Zero is non-existence. Yet, in the actual study of mathematics, one learns that zero may be many things, but never nothing at all. Zero is perhaps the most powerful number in all of mathematics, and its influence on the way we work with numbers is clear.
Multiply a number, any number, from the greatest to the small, from positive to negative infinity, by zero. Divide zero by any of these numbers. Zero absolves, absorbs, changes said number completely - it becomes zero. Surely, such a drastic effect cannot be the result of nothing.
Divide by zero. Or attempt to, anyway, and find it impossible, "undefined." A graphed function involving a division of zero will form unreachable vertical asymptotes that stretch to positive and negative infinity.
Zero, though, does have its weaknesses. Add zero, subtract zero, it’s all the same: no effect at all. The other numbers or variables invo...
... middle of paper ...
...tranger. San Francisco: Knopf, 1998.
Descartes, René. Descartes: Selections. Ed. Ralph M. Eaton. San Francisco: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1927.
Family Medical Guide. Lincolnwood: Publications International, Ltd., 1990.
Miller, Charles D. and Margaret L. Lial. Fundamentals of College Algebra. Third Edition. Glenview: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1990.
Naparstek, Belleruth. Your Sixth Sense. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1997.
Reid, Constance. From Zero to Infinity: What Makes Numbers Interesting. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1964.
Satre, Jean-Paul. "Nausea." Nausea, The Wall, and Other Stories. New York: MJF Books, 1964.
Twain, Mark. "The Mysterious Stranger." Great Short Works of Mark Twain. Ed. Justin
Kaplan. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1967.
"Vacuum." The Columbia Encyclopedia. Fifth Edition. Columbia University Press, 1993.
On the second day of class, the Professor Judit Kerekes developed a short chart of the Xmania system and briefly explained how students would experience a number problem. Professor Kerekes invented letters to name the quantities such as “A” for one box, “B” for two boxes. “C” is for three boxes, “D” is for four boxes and “E” is for five boxes. This chart confused me because I wasn’t too familiar with this system. One thing that generated a lot of excitement for me was when she used huge foam blocks shaped as dice. A student threw two blocks across the room and identified the symbol “0”, “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, and “E.” To everyone’s amazement, we had fun practicing the Xmania system and learned as each table took turns trying to work out problems.
The Zero does a great job of representing the claim that was presented. A good example would be when Constancia was getting ready to go to the mall with her friends: “My
Absolutely, if he exists and nothing else exists how can he exists? is he god? does he create the
Throughout history there has always been discussions and theories as to how the universe came to be. Where did it come from? How did it happen? Was it through God that the universe was made? These philosophies have been discussed and rejected and new theories have been created. I will discuss three theories from our studies, Kalam’s Cosmological Argument, Aquinas’s Design Argument, and Paley’s Design Argument. In this article, I will discuss the arguments and what these arguments state as their belief. A common belief from these three theories is that the universe is not infinite, meaning that the universe was created and has a beginning date. Each believe that there was a God, deity, or master creator that created the universe for a reason. They also believe that
... matter to forms of existence in the mind, for example to argue along with Berkeley (1710) that material events only exist in so far as they are perceived to exist (idealism). Idealism has its modern defenders, for example in some interpretations of the observer effect in quantum mechanics (the view that the Shrodinger wave equation only collapses into an actuality once an observation is made). In the macroworld it may also be true that the world as-perceived only exists if there are perceivers (Velmans 1990). However, as a general theory of the ontology of macroevents this position has its own well-known problems. It might be that the material world cannot have an appearance without perceivers, but it seems counterintuitive that its very existence is similarly vulnerable. Closing one's eyes, for example, does not seem to be enough to make unpleasant events go away.
Humans can never know for the certain why the universe was created or what caused it but, we can still create arguments and theories to best explain what might have created the universe. The cosmological argument is another idea to prove the existence of god. Many philosophers debate wheatear the cosmological argument is valid. The cosmological argument starts off quite simply: whatever exists must come from something else. Nothing is the source of its own existences, nothing is self-creating []. The cosmological argument states at some point, the cause and effect sequence must have a beginning. This unexpected phenomenal being is god. According to the argument, god is the initial start of the universe as we know it. Though nothing is self-creating cosmological believers say god is the only being the is self –created. Aquinas, an Italian philosopher, defended the argument and developed the five philosophical proofs for the existence of god knows as, the “Five Ways”.[]. In each “way” he describes his proof how god fills in the blanks of the unexplainable. The first way simply states that, things in motion must be put in motion by something. The second was is efficient because, nothing brings its self into existence. The third is, possibility and necessity [!]. Aqunhias’ has two more ‘ways’ but for the purpose of this essay I won’t be focusing on them heavily. These ways have started philosophers to debate and question his arguments ultimately made the cosmological argument debatable. The cosmological argument is however not a valid argument in explaining the existence of god because the conclusions do not logically follow the premises.
...t well and sounded good? I would like to think that the numbers are like art in the sense that they affect us in different ways.
The cosmological argument is the existence of God, arguing that the possibility of each existing and the domain collected of such elements in this universe. The inquiry is that 'for what reason does anything exist? Why as opposed to nothing? In this paper, I will explain for what reason does everything need cause? Why is God thought to be the principal cause?
Veron, J. E. N. A Reef in Time: The Great Barrier Reef from Beginning to End. Cambridge, MA:
In the construction of the Large Hardon Collider, physicists seek and hope to unlock the mysteries of the universe by analyzing the attributes of the most miniscule particles known to man. In the same way, theologians have argued back and forth over the course of human history with regards to the divine attributes of God, seeking and hoping to unlock the mysteries of the metaphysical universe. Although these many attributes, for example omnipresence, could be debated and dissected ad nauseum, it is within the scope of this research paper to focus but on one of them. Of these many divine attributes of God, nothing strikes me as more intriguing than that of God’s omnipotence. It is intriguing to me because the exploration of this subject not only promises an exhilarating exercise in the human faculties of logic, it also offers an explanation into the practical, such as that of the existence of evil, which we live amidst every day. So with both of these elements in hand, I am going to take on the task of digging deeper into the divine attribute of omnipotence in hopes of revealing more of the glory of God, and simultaneously bringing greater humility to the human thinker. In order to gain a better understanding on the subject of divine omnipotence, I am going to analyze four aspects of it. First, I am going to build a working definition of what we mean when we say that God is omnipotent. Second, I am going to discuss the relationship between divine omnipotence and logic. Third, I am going to discuss the relationship between God’s omnipotence and God’s timelessness. Last, I am going to analyze God’s omnipotence in relation to the existence of evil in the world. Through the analysis of these four topics in relation to om...
(iii) The totality of things was and will forever be as it is now; this totality does not change, and there is nothing external to that things might be introduced to change it.
Countless time teachers encounter students that struggle with mathematical concepts trough elementary grades. Often, the struggle stems from the inability to comprehend the mathematical concept of place value. “Understanding our place value system is an essential foundation for all computations with whole numbers” (Burns, 2010, p. 20). Students that recognize the composition of the numbers have more flexibility in mathematical computation. “Not only does the base-ten system allow us to express arbitrarily large numbers and arbitrarily small numbers, but it also enables us to quickly compare numbers and assess the ballpark size of a number” (Beckmann, 2014a, p. 1). Addressing student misconceptions should be part of every lesson. If a student perpetuates place value misconceptions they will not be able to fully recognize and explain other mathematical ideas. In this paper, I will analyze some misconceptions relating place value and suggest some strategies to help students understand the concept of place value.
To investigate the notion of numeracy, I approach seven people to give their view of numeracy and how it relates to mathematics. The following is a discussion of two responses I receive from this short survey. I shall briefly discuss their views of numeracy and how it relates to mathematics in the light of the Australian Curriculum as well as the 21st Century Numeracy Model (Goos 2007). Note: see appendix 1 for their responses.
Type A Personality or Type A Behavior Pattern (TABP) include typical responses of competitiveness, time urgency, and hostility. Type A’s normally strive towards a goal without feeling a sense of joy in their efforts or accomplishments. They also seem to be in a constant struggle against the clock and become impatient with any delays and unproductive time. Type A’s also tend to see the worse in others and display anger, envy and lack of compassion (McLeod, 2017).
Present day zero is quite different from its previous forms. Many concepts have been passed down, and many have been forgotten. Zero is the only number that is neither positive of negative. It has no effect on any quantity. Zero is a number lower than one. It is considered an item that is empty. There are two common uses of zero: 1. an empty place indicator in a number system, 2. the number itself, zero. Zero exist everywhere; although it took many civilizations to establish it.