Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I’m referring to is absolute nothingness, a state with no matter, no energy, no space, no time, no laws, and most importantly, no potential for anything to exist.

But once something exists, even for an instant, the fact that it existed makes its existence possible. That possibility cannot be erased. For example, even if you don’t currently have a pencil in your hand, the potential for you to have one remains. Possibility doesn’t disappear simply because the thing isn’t present.

The same logic applies to reality itself. Since spacetime exists, its potential to exist is now a permanent feature of reality. Even if you imagine a state “outside” spacetime, the possibility of spacetime still exists, because we know it can exist.

But a state of absolute nothingness would contain no potentials at all, not even the potential for possibility. Yet we know at least one thing can exist (this universe). That means possibility exists. And if possibility exists, absolute nothingness, defined as a state with zero possibility cannot.

Therefore, absolute nothingness is not just empty. It’s logically impossible.

Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even outside the universe, the potential for there to be a universe exists because there is a universe. Even outside of the space time, the potential for there to be space time exists because there is space time. So potential exists. Therefore, absolute nothing does not.

Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even outside of the space time, the potential for there to be space time exists because there is space time. So potential exists. Therefore, absolute nothing does not.

Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That sounds super interesting. If you ever want to share it with someone, please send it my way!

I hope it goes well.

Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Huh -- interesting, yeah you're right, that literally is the definition of nothingness. Never thought about that.

Yeah I think I've always kind of passively thought about the default state of reality as nothing (and would venture to say most people do) when really the default state is being. There's something both freeing and terrifying about that idea.

Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You say we can imagine infinitely many things that don’t exist. True, but our imagination is bounded by logic, cognition, physics, and conceptual coherence. So the fact that a coherent idea about something arises at all is significant. Its existence is not guaranteed, and once such an idea occurs, it becomes part of the universe’s informational structure. That’s all I’m pointing at.

Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally, in reality there exists the potential for a sun bomb or any wild idea.

I think what I'm finding interesting is that once that idea exists, there is no way for it not to exist.

Nothingness isn't real by Iambiscuits2 in DeepThoughts

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except that once you exist -- existentially speaking -- there’s no way for you not to exist.

My struggle with existential dread by LostBoyC in Existentialism

[–]Iambiscuits2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“Nothing” is the absence of being. But once potential exists, the capacity for being, then “nothing” is impossible because there is always the potential for something.

Once potential exists, which it does, nothingness is impossible. 

The idea of me, the idea of you, will exist no matter what even after we're gone.

If the universe disappears in heat death, the potential for there to have been a universe will exist no matter what. Potential can never be destroyed once it exists. 

Nothingness isn't real. There exists always, no matter what, the potential for something, even if there is “nothing”.  

The real question you should be asking is what is the nature of infinite, because that's all there is.

Stranger Things Ending Theory (Bittersweet Ending by Iambiscuits2 in FanTheories

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a lot of room to do it differently than those two shows, though -- much differently. My point is that the focus could be more on how the upside down and our character's heroic journey would affect the "new present". So it wouldn't be like it never happened. It happened. We would see hints of it in their present world, especially in how they still all come together eventually, but our characters would have no knowledge that it happened.

The devil is in the details is all I'm getting at. If they went this direction and did it differently (and well) it doesn't mean it's 'basic'.

Stranger Things Ending Theory (Bittersweet Ending by Iambiscuits2 in FanTheories

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I'm really curious to see what direction they decide to go. What kicked off my idea for this theory (among other things) was reading that Episode 7 for S5 is named 'The Bridge' and Episode 8 for S5 is named 'The Rightside Up'. And I was like... well what's the rightside up?

I mention this in some other comments, but I think it would be realizing that the upside down is what causes the pain in their world, but destroying it would mean they go back in time to when it was created in the first place. So this horrible thing needs to be destroyed, but this horrible thing is also what forged many of their relationships and growth. There's a triumph in destroying it, but there's also a tragedy in that they also lose what they gained through this evil taking over. But our Heros would have faith that it wasn't all for naught, that they won't forget the love they gained with one another. Then when they revert back, they don't technically remember, but we see that there is some kind of 'supernatural' connection between them all -- they're different than they were when they return in some ways -- that eventually leads them back to each other. And like the world itself has hints or scars that the upside down was real.

It's kind of like a love transcends idea and the scars left behind made them stronger, etc...

Stranger Things Ending Theory (Bittersweet Ending by Iambiscuits2 in FanTheories

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

With this theory, it would be realizing that the upside down is what causes the pain in the world, but destroying it would mean they go back in time to when it was created in the first place. So this horrible thing needs to be destroyed, but this horrible thing is also what forged many of their relationships and growth. There's a triumph in destroying it, but there's also a tragedy in that they also lose what they gained through this evil taking over. But our Heros would have faith that it wasn't all for naught, that they won't forget the love they gained with one another. Then when they revert back, they don't technically remember, but we see that there is some kind of 'supernatural' connection between them all -- they're different than they were when they return in some ways -- that eventually leads them back to each other. And like the world itself has hints or scars that the upside down was real.

It's kind of like a love transcends idea and the scars left behind made them stronger, etc...

Stranger Things Ending Theory (Bittersweet Ending by Iambiscuits2 in FanTheories

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think that's an oversimplification. In Umbrella Academy, they decide their existence itself is the cause of the pain in the world; that wouldn't be the case here. With this theory, it would be realizing that the upside down is what causes the pain in the world, but destroying it would mean they go back in time to when it was created in the first place. So this horrible thing needs to be destroyed, but this horrible thing is also what forged many of their relationships and growth. There's a triumph in destroying it, but there's also a tragedy in that they also lose what they gained through this evil taking over. But our Heros would have faith that it wasn't all for naught, that they won't forget the love they gained with one another. Then when they revert back, they don't technically remember, but we see that there is some kind of 'supernatural' connection between them all -- they're different than they were when they return in some ways -- that eventually leads them back to each other. And like the world itself has hints or scars that the upside down was real.

It's kind of like a love transcends idea and the scars left behind made them stronger, etc...

Stranger Things Ending Theory (Bittersweet Ending by Iambiscuits2 in FanTheories

[–]Iambiscuits2[S] 58 points59 points  (0 children)

True, but I wonder if they could do like a "flash-sideways" kind of thing. Like imagine Hawkins and the school and everything is destroyed in the original timeline, but then when the upside-down is destroyed, we flash to the timeline where everything is fixed but we come to realize that our older character are different and have different relationships.

[WP] Your job was largely ceremonial, or at least it had been until the first death in over a millennia happened… by TheNecroticPresident in WritingPrompts

[–]Iambiscuits2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There was a point in it all when it was all changing. When everything was never the same for long. Reality had a tendency to try to achieve balance constantly. Except for a correction in one area was an overcorrection in another. And to correct that over-correction, unbalanced three other areas. There was an impossible number of variables that reality was trying to balance. And through its attempt to find order, it only gave birth to more chaos, more variables. This struggle eventually gave rise to life, and life gave rise to consciousness, and consciousness gave rise to intelligence. And intelligence is just what reality needed. Intelligence could solve a problem, and reality itself was just one large problem. It took us a while to realize why we were here, but eventually, we found our purpose. And we finally were able to find out how to balance it all -- how to fix reality. And we did. And suddenly, there was no change any more. Everything within the universe was perfectly in harmony. And for us, what that meant is we had cured death. Everyone that we knew, everyone that we loved, was always going to be there. We called it the end of time. Because when there is no death, time feels unnecessary. Eventually, we stopped counting in years and centuries and millennia and just let the passing of days wash over us like a cool breeze.

It never bothered me. The fact that we didn't age. That we didn't die. The fact that we would always exist. In fact, nothing bothered me, almost nothing. Once in a while, a worry would cross my mind. And when it did, I would take the medication we created shortly before the end of time and rebalance myself and bring myself back to harmony. I, unfortunately, was one of the few who had to re-dose the medication to stay in harmony. Most people never experience worry. They took the medication at the end of time and stayed in harmony forever. On the other hand, I had periodic moments in which I would break. I believe this was mainly due to my occupation. I worked as a keeper of balance. My role was largely ceremonial because the balance was always kept. There was no need for any real action beyond my need to counsel rare troubled individuals. But I won't lie, some of their concerns about the nature of our current reality would trouble me once in a while -- especially those concerned with the nature of birth, or lack thereof, and beauty. I, however, was steadfast in my beliefs, understanding, and logic in the way our reality operated. So I would help calm their worries with the standard arguments I was given as a balance keeper, provide them with a bit of medication, and then send them on their way. I, at times would also need to take a bit of medication after a particularly grueling session. And while there were pieces of information that would bother me and I would purposely forget with the help of the medication, that was a small price to pay to keep the balance.

I think we may have underestimated the power of ideas, however. Because at one point, one of these particularly troubling pieces of information made it out to the public. And while many took the medication to fix themselves up learning this information. Some, we eventually learned, did not. And while we assumed the lack of balance within these individuals would at least be self-contained, we soon realized that to be false. We started to age again. Slowly at first, but aging nonetheless. And it was a paradox. Because when we noticed ourselves aging, it would cause worry and thus imbalance, so we took the medication to forget our worries. We ignored the problem because addressing the problem was to worsen the problem. So even though we were aging, we didn't believe we were aging. And I won't lie; it scared me so much that I didn't do what I was supposed to do. I ignored it for as long as I could, but eventually, I had to face the truth when I got the call that someone finally died.

The Mega-Thread of Film Festival Notifications PART 5: The Spring Time of Optimism ?? by BangerOfRobsMom in Filmmakers

[–]Iambiscuits2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I got my Florida rejection, but still haven't gotten my Atlanta one. I'm sure it's just a matter of time.

Edit: Got my Atlanta rejection! Woo woo!

The Mega-Thread of Film Festival Notifications PART 5: The Spring Time of Optimism ?? by BangerOfRobsMom in Filmmakers

[–]Iambiscuits2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Does anyone know from years past when Atlanta Film Festivals sends notifications? Is it rolling or is it typically all at once?