In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
Quantum mechanics tells us that "nothing" is inherently unstable, so the initial leap from nothing to something may have been inevitable. Then the resulting tiny bubble of space-time could have burgeoned into a massive, busy universe, thanks to inflation. As Krauss puts it, "The laws of physics as we understand them make it eminently plausible that our universe arose from nothing - no space, no time, no particles, nothing that we now know of."
Can something come out of nothing? — Pippen
Krauss is one of the few living physicists described by Scientific American as a "public intellectual"[21] and he is the only physicist to have received awards from all three major American physics societies: the American Physical Society, the American Association of Physics Teachers, and the American Institute of Physics. In 2012, he was awarded the National Science Board's Public Service Medal for his contributions to public education in science and engineering in the United States.[34]
Krauss reacted vehemently and responded in an interview published in The Atlantic[6] calling Albert “moronic” and dismissing the philosophy of science as worthless. In March 2013, The New York Times reported[7] that Albert, who had previously been invited to speak at the Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate at the American Museum of Natural History, was later disinvited. Albert claimed "It sparked a suspicion that Krauss must have demanded that I not be invited. But of course I’ve got no proof."
As Krauss puts it, "The laws of physics as we understand them make it eminently plausible that our universe arose from nothing - no space, no time, no particles, nothing that we now know of."
The particular, eternally persisting, elementary physical stuff of the world, according to the standard presentations of relativistic quantum field theories, consists (unsurprisingly) of relativistic quantum fields. And the fundamental laws of this theory take the form of rules concerning which arrangements of those fields are physically possible and which aren’t, and rules connecting the arrangements of those fields at later times to their arrangements at earlier times, and so on — and they have nothing whatsoever to say on the subject of where those fields came from, or of why the world should have consisted of the particular kinds of fields it does, or of why it should have consisted of fields at all, or of why there should have been a world in the first place. Period. Case closed. End of story. — David Albert
On a more serious note, the whole flaw with Krauss’ book, which is called ‘A Universe from Nothing’, is that it assumes the laws of physics. So it’s actually about ‘nothing’ PLUS ‘the laws of physics’. And the laws of physics ain’t nothing. Yet this fact, which seems elemental to me, escapes Krauss, who seems nonetheless to be feted for his perspicuity. — Wayfarer
Quantum mechanics tells us that "nothing" is inherently unstable, so the initial leap from nothing to something may have been inevitable.
Stability is a property. The predication of "unstable" to "nothing", requires the assumption that nothing is something. — Metaphysician Undercover
it is quantum theory that posits the possibility of creatio ex nihilo. — Cavacava
It's not begging the question, it's just a matter of obeying the fundamental grammar of the English language. — Metaphysician Undercover
Yea, as I said, I'll go with the Biblical account for now, just not sure about the deity or force that made the difference.
Even if this field has existed and will always exist, why does it exist,and what changed and why, in order for us to exist?
I don't know enough about this stuff, and from the little I understand, it seems to me that we are not even close to understanding it. Under some interpretations, as Wayfarer indicated, the physicists are proving the theologians were right all along. Physicists try to escape to the multiverse, but this is just a ruse in my opinion. — Cavacava
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.