A Language of Metaphors: Chapter 4

Everything About "Nothing"

We looked briefly at the dimensions earlier, but now we'll look at things a bit differently. This time we'll view them as if they were strictly numerical , and not the "be all and end all" they really are. But first, a word from our sponsor...

Whoa!! Good product !! Let's examine it closely; I'm sure it will be handy to the Language of Metaphors.

What a joy math can be. Division, integrals, square roots and trigonometry. Mmmm. But really, who's counting? Although it appears that some form of counting ability is a natural part of our brain, how often do we count and how often do we compare? Goldilocks didn't measure - she compared. She assigned a single measure, such as "size" or "temperature"; and a comparison with "too" or "just right". Her lack of vocabulary aside, she was indeed far quicker at decision making than Little Red Riding Hood, who had to go through a string of parametrical measurements to arrive at her just-in-timely decision.

Let's look at something I like to call "nothing". "Nothing is what nothing does" a misquoted Mr. Gump exclaimed. Well said. Nothing is nothing. No space, no time, no energy, no matter. It does not exist and has no value. Even a "zero" has the honor of holding a place in math - but nothing is even less than a mathematical placeholder - an infinite number of nothings will fit in anything, no matter how small. If one were to mark a "nothing" on a ruler, it would be a point without thickness somewhere along the rulers' length.

"Something" is anything. "Some" plus "thing" equals "something". "None" can never qualify as "some": this is because "some" is used only where there is an actual amount of something. A "something" can always be measured or counted: it may be of any tangible length along that ruler, perhaps, even between two "nothings".

"Everything" is all there is, was or will ever be. It is all that could be - perhaps even that which can't. It is an infinite length along that ruler, which no number of "somethings" will ever amount to.

Nothing, something and everything. "All or nothing" or somewhere in between. Pretty simple. But there's more.

You see, two nothings can be compared, but only by their locations - this is the purest form of "context". A "nothing" cannot be directly compared in location to the entirety of a "something", since a "something" is actually an infinite number of "nothings" strung together, each with their own unique corresponding location. In turn, two "somethings" may be compared, as Goldilocks has demonstrated; but neither can be truly comparable to "everything": This is because any number of "somethings" can be added together and never become an "everything". Two "everythings" are comparable within their infinite natures - that is, they are bigger than anything in their realm. 

Both "everythings" and "nothings" are stuck in a rut. An "everything" cannot effectively change. It is always its own limit. A "nothing" cannot change either: you cannot truly add to it without destroying its very nature - and nothing will fit in it anyway!!

What does all this mean? For starters, if something is large and another is tiny, they are equal to each other from the perspective of infinity. If two things differ in mass - so what?! In the Bible, Gods lifespan is described with "One day is as a thousand years"; obviously the infinite nature of God is unconcerned with the finite realm of proportionality, thus the term "is as" was used.

Let's apply this to space. We call it "space" because we see chunks of matter surrounded by huge distances. Now we'll take a peek inside the atom. Same thing. Relative to the whole size of the atom, the bits of matter are incredibly small. Just as with outer space, atoms are mostly emptiness. The solid things around you don't seem so solid now, do they? Try this...

The atom is the solar system of matter.

A whirlpool is a (spiral) galaxy of atoms.

Now the metaphor is changing - becoming more like a truthful relativity than a simple comparison of similarity. If all the dimensions can be viewed as infinites; and each parameter we set can be categorized as a nothing, something or everything within each dimension; we could presumably define all things in a simplistic "metaphor-ready" fashion. What's more, we may even be able to cross dimensions....

Transportation and communication are divided basically between material movement and signal movement. Little energy requirement, high speed, physical range and intact delivery  are among the common essentials of both fields. In other words, a perfect delivery of material or signal would take: a "nothing" of energy; an "everything" of distance over a "nothing" of time; with an "everything" of three dimensional range; and arrive in the identical condition to that which it was shipped in, as if "nothing" had ever "happened". Both transportation and communication aim at an ultra-pure change of three-dimensional location. The only difference in principle between these two, then, it seems, is that one moves matter and the other moves energy. This is why the two are virtually interchangeable, metaphorically. The structural and functional similarities found between our blood supply (transportation) and our nervous system (communication) is a perfect illustration of this point.

The internet is replacing the telephone as the nervous system of society.

The 401 highway is a major artery of Toronto.

"The internet is the information superhighway."

It might be best to close this section, for now, as it may be good for you to let this sink in. Sit back and relax, perhaps thinking about the various things of our life that involve transportation or communication. Look at what you know about how water gets delivered to your sink. Think about the electricity flowing from far away, then into your home, then through the many circuits of your appliances. Think about mail. Think rivers and trees and lightening. While picturing these things, remember the devices and problems along the way: for example, " What does a dam do?"; or "What do a trees roots do when they meet up with a rock?"; how about "What are the similarities between the causes and treatments for an accident-caused traffic jam, a clog in your sink, or a build-up of cholesterol on an artery wall?".

We are about to enter the most fascinating and useful aspects of the "Language of Metaphors". But think first, then ask questions!!

Forming a meaningful matrix...

Copyright: John D. Casnig 2000 - Use with permission only.