space 

is the boundless three-dimensional extent in which objects and events have

relative position and direction.[1] In classical physics, physical space is often conceived in
three linear dimensions, although modern physicists usually consider it, with time, to be part of a
boundless four-dimensional continuum known as spacetime. The concept of space is considered to
be of fundamental importance to an understanding of the physical universe. However, disagreement
continues between philosophers over whether it is itself an entity, a relationship between entities, or
part of a conceptual framework.
Debates concerning the nature, essence and the mode of existence of space date back to antiquity;
namely, to treatises like the Timaeus of Plato, or Socrates in his reflections on what the Greeks
called khôra (i.e. "space"), or in the Physics of Aristotle (Book IV, Delta) in the definition of topos (i.e.
place), or in the later "geometrical conception of place" as "space qua extension" in the Discourse
on Place (Qawl fi al-Makan) of the 11th-century Arab polymath Alhazen.[2] Many of these classical
philosophical questions were discussed in the Renaissance and then reformulated in the 17th
century, particularly during the early development of classical mechanics. In Isaac Newton's view,
space was absolute—in the sense that it existed permanently and independently of whether there
was any matter in the space.[3] Other natural philosophers, notably Gottfried Leibniz, thought instead
that space was in fact a collection of relations between objects, given by
their distance and direction from one another. In the 18th century, the philosopher and
theologian George Berkeley attempted to refute the "visibility of spatial depth" in his Essay Towards
a New Theory of Vision. Later, the metaphysician Immanuel Kant said that the concepts of space
and time are not empirical ones derived from experiences of the outside world—they are elements of
an already given systematic framework that humans possess and use to structure all experiences.
Kant referred to the experience of "space" in his Critique of Pure Reason as being a subjective
"pure a priori form of intuition".
In the 19th and 20th centuries mathematicians began to examine geometries that are non-
Euclidean, in which space is conceived as
Following Galileo and Descartes, during the seventeenth century the philosophy of space and
time revolved around the ideas of Gottfried Leibniz, a German philosopher–mathematician,
and Isaac Newton, who set out two opposing theories of what space is. Rather than being an entity
that independently exists over and above other matter, Leibniz held that space is no more than the
collection of spatial relations between objects in the world: "space is that which results from places
taken together".[10] Unoccupied regions are those that could have objects in them, and thus spatial
relations with other places. For Leibniz, then, space was an idealised abstraction from the relations
between individual entities or their possible locations and therefore could not be continuous but must
be discrete.[11] Space could be thought of in a similar way to the relations between family members.
Although people in the family are related to one another, the relations do not exist independently of
the people.[12] Leibniz argued that space could not exist independently of objects in the world
because that implies a difference between two universes exactly alike except for the location of the
material world in each universe. But since there would be no observational way of telling these
universes apart then, according to the identity of indiscernibles, there would be no real difference
between them. According to the principle of sufficient reason, any theory of space that implied that
there could be these two possible universes must therefore be wrong.[13]
Following Galileo and Descartes, during the seventeenth century the philosophy of space and
time revolved around the ideas of Gottfried Leibniz, a German philosopher–mathematician,
and Isaac Newton, who set out two opposing theories of what space is. Rather than being an entity
that independently exists over and above other matter, Leibniz held that space is no more than the
collection of spatial relations between objects in the world: "space is that which results from places
taken together".[10] Unoccupied regions are those that could have objects in them, and thus spatial
relations with other places. For Leibniz, then, space was an idealised abstraction from the relations
between individual entities or their possible locations and therefore could not be continuous but must
be discrete.[11] Space could be thought of in a similar way to the relations between family members.
Although people in the family are related to one another, the relations do not exist independently of
the people.[12] Leibniz argued that space could not exist independently of objects in the world
because that implies a difference between two universes exactly alike except for the location of the
material world in each universe. But since there would be no observational way of telling these
universes apart then, according to the identity of indiscernibles, there would be no real difference
between them. According to the principle of sufficient reason, any theory of space that implied that
there could be these two possible universes must therefore be wrong.[13]