Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ...
by Zondartul on Thursday February 15, 2024 @02:04PM
(#39386940)
A silly thought I had while reading that article: it presupposes that "nothing" is a noun. In doing so, it assumes that in the sentence "the <noun> <verbs>" you can substitute "nothing" and it would mean "<nothing> is an entity that does the <verbing>" instead of "<verbing> simply does not happen", and I feel that is a meaningful distinction.
Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ...
by DemocracyFTW2 on Friday February 16, 2024 @01:49AM
(#39394012)
> Sadly (?) the word "nothing" seems to have become overloaded
"Infinity" is another one of those things that used to be murky, but simple; after Cantor we now have different infinities ℵ0, ℵ1... an un-Ockhamian proliferation of terms, and we have to worry about the spaces between them. Science ruins everything!
Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ...
by throw0101c on Friday February 16, 2024 @09:47AM
(#39397721)
The use of "literally" to mean figuratively has grown in popularity in recent years (as a form of emphasis); though it is not a new use:
* https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/misuse-of-literally
Sadly (?) the word "nothing" seems to have become overloaded, so now—depending on who you talk to—you can have the word pointing to different concepts. See "seven types/levels of nothing":
* https://rlkuhn.com/wp-content/uploads/Closer-to-Truth-Essays...
* https://closertotruth.com/news/levels-of-nothing-by-robert-l...