Space... for me means something that is able to contain mass or energy in general. Where there is no space - is there NOTHING? now trying to imagine that is harder than imagining many other things - the bounbdary between space and nothing.

having mass? probably not by itself. OK imagine vacuum. BTW does vacuum have temperature? never really understood this. if we make a perfect vacuum and put our fingers lets say through it - does it have temperature? How can it if even air isnt there? There is radiation, but that should be minimum. Or wouldnt we even fell cold as there is no heat loss by conduction?

Now why time and space are interconnected - that is the question. If we have space with NOTHING in it.... ah!! just realized that "space" with nothing is nothing, and when light reaches this "nothing" it becomes space. is it by chance that universe xpands by speed of light? So what is "empty space" without anything in it and temp of 0 K - is that space or that nothing??

cool thoughts

the absolute vacuum is absolutely cold
i have a vacuum pump =P not to imply that this absolute level can be reached.. mass exists still which means space exists and volume and heat.. and when the big bang occurred expanding at the speed of light the absolute heat met the absolute cold creating all of this polarized stuff
but you have helped me answer my question
mass creates space volume
this is the stretching effect of gravity in effect..
like you said where there is no space there is nothing
and it is hard to imagine i agree

Is it? ok then if it is not absolute cold we have - e.g. using simple instruments. what is the temperature there? if not absolute - if its almost complete vacuum then is the temp closer to absolute zero? a strange physics question... can be there tempearture if theres no mass but just energy?
less pressure lower temp? is that why gases cool when expanded? but vacuum. stil dont understand how there can be almost absolute zero temp in lets say a small thermos flask and all around room temp! and if we went into a vacuum - what would happen? (implying we just have a breathing apparatus but are in vacuum)? would we burst? heard yes but then also that not really...

this is all theoretical physics..
absolute vacuums and absolute zero temps have never been achieved by man
but theoretically thats how it would work but its still very hard to imagine
but by lowering pressure we can lower temp and vice versa
thats a good question you proposed about mass and an absolute vacuum though
but does this not defeat the definition of 'temperature'? which is a measurement of kinetic energy of atoms
atoms being particles
if there are no particles how can we take a temp?
well 0 mass equals 0 temp
just like 0 mass equals 0 space
0 is simply the absence of this quality not a specific measurement that could ever be read on a thermometer
another words its all theoretical
the big bang tries to shine light on this theory by working backwards through time while still following the physical laws apparent to us now and creates this strange scenario for us that we can only think about
but at first there was no mass
and thats when we assume this absolute cold existed
and somehow mass was forced into physical existence and during that process lots of heat and radiation was created

Mass, Energy, Time, these map the territory but do not belong to the territory.

They belong to the mind.

:p

what is this 'territory' your referring to plex?
please share your ideas on mind mass energy and time and explain this territory you speak of
im interested =)
lots of great philosophers have alot to say on quality and how the mind interprets it, what do you think plex? do these qualities change from mind to mind or is the quality of mass perceived the same way through everyones mind as it appears to be?
i agree with most of what you said im just unfamiliar with the territory term

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22map+not+the+territory%22

"Qualia" is again worth an entre thread all to itself.

In the mean time:

Qualia - Google Search

Some define space as nothing but i do not. so yes i believe that space has mass

There is no such beast possible as empty space. Zero energy is not possible. The uncertainty principle of Heisenberg demands that there be quantum fluctuations in it. A continuous flow of new virtual particles is created and eliminated every second. There is a relationship between the life expectancy of these particles and their mass.

How much space does this post occupy?

I think that altough we consider empty space to be empty to simplificate things, there is an infinite amount of smaller and smaller things inside any piece of space, and inside any piece of matter as well. Kind of: Atoms are made from sub-atomic particles wich are made of something else, with this "something else" also being made of a smaller something else, etc... so the idea is something along the lines of "Nothing is empty space, but there will always be something that seens to be".

In vacuum you do not lose heat to conduction and there is nothing between you and radiation from other heat sources so I believe you tend to heat up, altough that depends of how far away you are from other things... because if you are too far away from heat sources or matter there is nothing to give you heat or reflect yours back at you, so you would cool down instead. (Ever body above absolute zero irradiates heat)

Gentlemen:

Space indeed, must have mass. Moreon: space itself is, what we call dark matter.
* According to General Relativity Theory, space undergoes elastic deformations by gravity. Elastic means that is able to stock mechanic (deformation) energy.
*As according to e=mc2 to any energy corresponds a mass, space itself, when influenced by gravity, should have mass.
* But if empty space, far away from any gravity field on the other hand, would not, this would not make any sense. So I conclude that everything, capabale to stock energy, by suffering any transformation (elastic deformation in our case), must have mass itself: you cannot bend "nothing" in an elastic manner.
* If space has mass, it should cause gravity. Indeed, it does.
In an empty space, far away from gravity fields, caused by visible matter, every space segment is influenced by the gravity fields of its neighbours: at the letft, at the right, above and below, front and rear, which anniquilate by vectorial overposicion, being all equal.
* But let's look at a very strong concentration of visible matter, like a galaxy.
Close to the centre of it, according to General Relativity Theory, space is bent towards it and thus compacted. Its higher density than that of the outer space should cause a stronger gravity field. Any space segment between both (centre of the galaxy and outer space), should suffer double attraction towards galaxy: 1st, by the gravity field of visible matter, 2nd. by the gravity field of the compacted space.
* Using this idea and calculating secondary, ternary, quarternary, aso. ... gravity field induced by successive space compactation of space, the result (primary gravity of visible matter + induced gravity by space compression) may be several times stronger than the original gravity caused by visible matter. This is the reason, why galaxies rotate much faster, than could be explained by the gravity of its visible matter.
* There is no "monster black hole" in their centre. By induced gravity, as explained, space itself is the black matter, astronomy is looking for.

Forgive me that I did not use maths and maybe my theory sounds littlebit infantile. I hope, it could convince nevertheless. I am a simple Ph.D in Chemistry, not in Quantum nor Astro Physics.

Yours truly:

Toivo Willmann