The Instigator
0cards0
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
phantom
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

what if the universe would disappear?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
phantom
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 759 times Debate No: 71097
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

0cards0

Pro

if the universe disappear would there still be an empty space where it once was?if yes then it would mean that that empty space is infinite,because if emptiness ends somewhere then its no longer empty,if the universe will disappear & there wont be empty space then what would there be? if its not empty then there is something there?so it looks like there are only two options,an infinite emptiness or an infinate somethingness? just a thought experimentA279;
phantom

Con

The universe equals the totality of existence. If the universe were to disappear, than everything would cease to exist. Space exists, so space would not exist if the universe disappeared. There simply wouldn't be anything that existed. Moreover, space is not some cosmic container within which the contents of the universe are put. According to general relativity, and as known from experiments, space without matter and energy doesn't really make any sense. Space is just a property of the gravitational field so space cannot exist apart from it, and therefore, not apart from matter and energy.

https://einstein.stanford.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
0cards0

Pro

0cards0 forfeited this round.
phantom

Con

Extend arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
0cards0

Pro

0cards0 forfeited this round.
phantom

Con

Extend arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
0cards0

Pro

0cards0 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
0cards0

Pro

0cards0 forfeited this round.
phantom

Con

phantom forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
Do you want this as a real debate, or just a conversation?

The short answer (without lots of research) is that
1) If the universe was "gone" there would be "nothing" because the universe is "everything.
2) The universe expands, just not how you think. The everything that is is in the universe. The universe is expanding, everything is moving away from other stuff. This, however, does not mean there is a "edge" or bound. Really, if you COULD look through the universe, you would see the back of your head. I can explain more (layman) but if you want a debate, or a conversation, that is the question.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
0cards0phantomTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments. Pro did not make any arguments, merely posing a "what if" question, that isn't a debatable resolution per se. Nonetheless, Con answered Pro's question eloquently, arguing that nothing would exist and the term "existence" becomes incoherent, since the universe is, by definition, "the totality of existence". Pro's forfeits hindered their ability to respond to this. S&G. Pro's argument was a bit muddled up and incoherent -- there's no punctuation, and Pro misspells "infinite," also making up a word "somethingness". The first question posed in R1 is also grammatically incoherent, since it lacks the necessary verb "would". Conduct. Pro has multiple forfeits, forfeiting the majority of the debate. As such, I award conduct, S&G, and arguments to Con.
Vote Placed by Illegalcombatant 2 years ago
Illegalcombatant
0cards0phantomTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: So much forfeit
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
0cards0phantomTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
0cards0phantomTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made no arguments except for the introductory paragraph. Con, in contrast, repsonded and then showed up for all but the last remaining round, which he can be easily forgiven for having forfeited given Pro's failure to participate in his own debate. Conduct and arguments go, obviously, to Con. What little Pro presented was rather muddled and had grammar issues, so S&G also go to Con. I'm tempted to award sources too, but it hardly seems worth it; Con only gave the one and it wasn't super integral.