What difference is there between nothingness and emptiness?
From Ancient Greece, it was believed that the void could not exist. Even Aristotle, many centuries ago, said: "Nature abhors the emptiness."
Consider an example we have a jar without water, that interior with nothing is taken as a void. A place where there is nothing. While NOTHING can be understood as a form of matter.
Because "nothingness" is nothing.
If nothing is defined as absence and nonexistence of any object, large or small. It would be something like absolute zero and infinity in ontological absence.
Although in the common sense "nothing" is used to refer to the absence of objects determined in a specific place and time. It should not be confused with non-existence.
The void is the double negation: it contains nothing.
Generally, nothingness is an ontological concept, and emptiness is related to nothingness, but from the point of view of physics and there are ways of measuring it, whereas nothingness can become a matter of metaphysics.
The philosophy behind nothingness and emptiness is not easily explained. I like to think that nothing exists...
The theory of relativity and laws of observation somehow helps to explain nothing to me in terms of something only existing when observed.
A void, on the other hand, or emptiness is also relative to the observer. To us, space is empty because we cannot observe or measure something definitively as being there. But that only makes it empty to us as the observer. Who knows what else is watching....
Thanks for your comment :)