Science, and personal everyday experience, I find, demonstrates the non-existence of boundaries quite clearly. The most obvious example would be something like a cloud, which looks as if it has a clear outline against the sky. But as I’m sure all of you know, any close examination of the cloud dispels any sense of inherently existing cloudness. The cloud’s existence depending on the observers perspective. You might say that the edge of a cloud is kind of like a gradient of molecules, with the density of those molecules dissipating along the edges. Which molecules on the edge of the cloud belong to the cloud and which don’t? It’s entirely the minds decision, it is not objective.
A water drop itself might seem rather concrete, but we know that instead of a boundary or case holding the drop together, the drop in fact is a lot like a cloud insofar as it is mostly empty space filled with finer molecules that issue wave lengths creating the illusion of an undifferentiated water droplet. Atoms themselves, instead of being concrete, homogenous, indivisible spheres, are just the expression of finer particles such as electrons and protons. Could you ever whittle matter down to a point where you finally found a homogenous particle that was encompassed in a true boundary? You could not. If you did find such a boundary, you would have to make certain it was indeed a boundary by measuring the boundary of the boundary, and that boundary would end with a boundary, and you would undoubtedly have an infinite regress.
So while scientific data clearly demonstrates the illusion of boundaries, philosophy demonstrates the illusion just as well.
Boundaries are purely mental constructions, our way of dividing the universe into manageable chunks. On the other hand, they’re not useless, of course. Firstly, the ‘fuzziness’ of a table is not on a scale that it makes any practical difference where we put our coffee cup - as we live, solid things act as though they have hard boundaries. Secondly, electromagnetism ensures that in a spatial continuum through which the distribution of atoms/molecules varies, effects will arise near areas of rapid change - so you get surface tension in liquids, surface energy in solids, powders can be highly explosive - the nature of boundaries often changes the behaviour of the materials from the bulk.
The lack of exact/precise boundary means the lack of separation/division.
I think things are far more intermingled than we tend to think.
It may also means the concept of division/separation is fundamentally flawed and it’s more like practical “way of seeing things” than many people seem to believe so firmly.
I think checking the boundaries is a very interesting exercise and also very revealing about many things.
PS.
People who worship something are usually very reluctant to verify the boundary of their sacred material. But this is applicable only to those who already know a bit about how vague the boundary can be. Those who happily believe in absolute clear cut division/separation would gladly explain about their view.
If someone insists something you don’t understand why, ask about the boundary and it can be interesting, revealing, entertaining, and also it can be rich in various perspectives.
As the OP points out, it is logically impossible for an infinitely exact boundary to physically exist. A singularity is an example of such a proposed entity and is logically absurd. But such absurdities do not tether the careless mind.
Every mind requires discernment between one point and another, one concept and another, or one direction or another. No rational decision can be made without it. Thus the propensity to define a boundary between one concern and another is not merely something evolution or bad habits provided, but is actually essential to day to day living.
The universe is an ocean of motion in reality. Such can be proven, not merely speculated. And just as the metaphor implies, there is no fine line between the rising of one wave and the valley of another. But in practical living, it is essential to distinguish between an impending high wave and a shallow valley.
“Clarify, Verify, and Remember the Hopes and Threats…”
Clarity, the very first step to deciding, entirely depends upon distinction. Not a single nerve can trigger if there is no distinction provided. Not a single thought can arise. The distinctions are the co-creators of all things. Distinction itself can validly be called, “God”, without which there could be no universe at all, much less fantasies about how it got here.
Thus we ESTIMATE until greater concern of hope or threat is detected.
