Nature abhors a vacuum and so do I.
One of the things I hate about vacuums is the difficulty in truly describing them. The dictionary gives the definition of “a space that is entirely devoid of matter,” but that gets into some tricky definitions of “entirely devoid” and “matter” especially when you start looking at light as both a particle and a wave.
In essence when one is describing a vacuum (the physics kind not the Electrolux kind) one is ostensibly describing an area of nothing. We all know how tricky describing nothing can be.
“A space that is entirely devoid of matter?”
Firslty, “a space”
How do you define the space? Is there a boundary where on one side there is something and on the other there isn’t? What is the interface of that boundary look like. Where do the molecules of something intermingle on the edges of the nothing… and if they are intermingling, doesn’t that mélange of something and nothing create a soup of kinda something?
Secondly, “entirely devoid”
“Entirely” means “wholly” or “completely” and “devoid” means “empty” or “missing.” So let’s parse this out a bit as well. “Wholly empty” is an odd set of terms. There is an idea that emptiness could be broken down into pieces otherwise the terms “entirely,” “wholly,” and “completely” are unnecessary. Why would one need to give that modifier if “nothing” is not divisible? The definitional nuances associated with “devoid,” “empty,” and “missing” could take days to talk about.
Thirdly, “matter”
I don’t want to get into the higher dimensionality of some of the sub-atomic/quantum physics particles to really talk about the make up of matter, but iffens y’all want me to go all quantum on this bitch, I will ask Dr B Dawg to lay down some slick physics lines, since his doctorate is in the Physics, yo. Anyone? Anyone?... Good, I didn’t think anyone wanted that. Let’s just agree to say that “matter” is not a simple matter.
As you can see, merely looking at a vacuum definitionally causes one to abhor it just like nature.
To recap:
I bet some of you are wishing the Yeti would email me antagonizing emails again
I do not control the Yeti and I have chosen the vacuum to be my favored enemy now
I get +1 to all dice rolls against a vacuum
I will whip something up for Digital Thursday tomorrow
I am starting this recap with too many “I” statements
I did it again, Crap!
Listening to Obey the Groove by No More Kings
One of the things I hate about vacuums is the difficulty in truly describing them. The dictionary gives the definition of “a space that is entirely devoid of matter,” but that gets into some tricky definitions of “entirely devoid” and “matter” especially when you start looking at light as both a particle and a wave.
In essence when one is describing a vacuum (the physics kind not the Electrolux kind) one is ostensibly describing an area of nothing. We all know how tricky describing nothing can be.
“A space that is entirely devoid of matter?”
Firslty, “a space”
How do you define the space? Is there a boundary where on one side there is something and on the other there isn’t? What is the interface of that boundary look like. Where do the molecules of something intermingle on the edges of the nothing… and if they are intermingling, doesn’t that mélange of something and nothing create a soup of kinda something?
Secondly, “entirely devoid”
“Entirely” means “wholly” or “completely” and “devoid” means “empty” or “missing.” So let’s parse this out a bit as well. “Wholly empty” is an odd set of terms. There is an idea that emptiness could be broken down into pieces otherwise the terms “entirely,” “wholly,” and “completely” are unnecessary. Why would one need to give that modifier if “nothing” is not divisible? The definitional nuances associated with “devoid,” “empty,” and “missing” could take days to talk about.
Thirdly, “matter”
I don’t want to get into the higher dimensionality of some of the sub-atomic/quantum physics particles to really talk about the make up of matter, but iffens y’all want me to go all quantum on this bitch, I will ask Dr B Dawg to lay down some slick physics lines, since his doctorate is in the Physics, yo. Anyone? Anyone?... Good, I didn’t think anyone wanted that. Let’s just agree to say that “matter” is not a simple matter.
As you can see, merely looking at a vacuum definitionally causes one to abhor it just like nature.
To recap:
I bet some of you are wishing the Yeti would email me antagonizing emails again
I do not control the Yeti and I have chosen the vacuum to be my favored enemy now
I get +1 to all dice rolls against a vacuum
I will whip something up for Digital Thursday tomorrow
I am starting this recap with too many “I” statements
I did it again, Crap!
Listening to Obey the Groove by No More Kings
