The zero-energy universe theory originated in 1973, when Edward Tryon proposed, in the journal Nature that the universe emerged from a large-scale quantum fluctuation of vacuum energy, resulting in its positive mass-energy being exactly balanced by its negative gravitational potential and certain famous atheists have used this theory to claim that the universe we live in, came from nothing. I, for one, disagree and suggest that this is impossible.
So, what do you say about the claim that our universe came from nothing?
A Universe from Nothing…
Moderator: Moderators
- Diagoras
- Guru
- Posts: 1388
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 580 times
Post #91
After reading the posts in this debate, I searched out Lawrence M. Krauss’ book, ‘A Universe From Nothing’ and found a free downloadable pdf copy. I’ve only had time to quickly browse a few chapters so far, but it seems to be an accessible explanation of some of the current theories surrounding the very beginning of the universe.
Something that I hadn’t appreciated before was the fact that our understanding of the universe has changed remarkably in a comparably short time. When Einstein was formulating his General Theory of Relativity to explain gravity, it was thought that the universe was static, and contained just one galaxy (our own). It wasn’t until Edwin Hubble proved that the distances to nebulae such as Andromeda were far too great to mean that they were in our galaxy, and subsequently discovered the ‘red shift’ of stars within other galaxies that led to an expanding universe being accepted.
Today, we’re grappling with all manner of equally new and baffling concepts, while at the same time, expanding our knowledge of things previously only hypothesised. We now have solid physical evidence for things like gravitational waves, the Higgs boson and black holes, rather than only mathematical models. We don’t yet fully understand ‘dark matter’ or ‘dark energy’, and we haven’t yet managed to join the theories of relativity (on the cosmological scale) to quantum theory on the sub-atomic scale. Lawrence Krauss covers a lot of this in the book. He makes the case that based on what we know, plus the track record of science being able to corroborate previous theories with strong physical evidence, the current explanations of the very beginning of the universe coming from ‘nothing’ and the ‘Big Bang’ inflation are in fact highly plausible.
I recommend downloading and reading the book first before casually dismissing the work of many people who have expanded our knowledge horizons.
Something that I hadn’t appreciated before was the fact that our understanding of the universe has changed remarkably in a comparably short time. When Einstein was formulating his General Theory of Relativity to explain gravity, it was thought that the universe was static, and contained just one galaxy (our own). It wasn’t until Edwin Hubble proved that the distances to nebulae such as Andromeda were far too great to mean that they were in our galaxy, and subsequently discovered the ‘red shift’ of stars within other galaxies that led to an expanding universe being accepted.
Today, we’re grappling with all manner of equally new and baffling concepts, while at the same time, expanding our knowledge of things previously only hypothesised. We now have solid physical evidence for things like gravitational waves, the Higgs boson and black holes, rather than only mathematical models. We don’t yet fully understand ‘dark matter’ or ‘dark energy’, and we haven’t yet managed to join the theories of relativity (on the cosmological scale) to quantum theory on the sub-atomic scale. Lawrence Krauss covers a lot of this in the book. He makes the case that based on what we know, plus the track record of science being able to corroborate previous theories with strong physical evidence, the current explanations of the very beginning of the universe coming from ‘nothing’ and the ‘Big Bang’ inflation are in fact highly plausible.
I recommend downloading and reading the book first before casually dismissing the work of many people who have expanded our knowledge horizons.
- Still small
- Apprentice
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am
- Location: Great South Land
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #92
Sorry, you are correct, I did mean ‘hypothetical’ (damn auto-correct 😒). As for the ‘reasoning’, the point was that by definition ‘science’ cannot investigate that which is outside of it’s realm being the physical universe. To assume something beyond this realm is not and cannot be ‘science’. To assume something beyond the natural or physical universe requires an assumption, again by definition, of the supernatural and/or the metaphysical, the existence of which most of you appear to deny.DrNoGods wrote:I think you meant "hypothetical" there (correct me if I'm wrong), but doesn't this exact same line of reasoning apply to the existence of gods? Or are gods to be accepted based on some other criterium?
So, do you accept the existence of the supernatural/metaphysical or not?
My belief, (which is not and cannot be based on science), is that there is a supernatural/metaphysical realm from which our natural/physical universe was formed. To me, this is the same as referring to our 4D space-time universe and extra dimensions which quantum physics and String Theory appear to suggest. Also, Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity implies at least one other spacial dimension. How so? GTR states that mass curves the fabric of space-time, (called gravity), usually visualised by a mass placed on a rubber sheet. The mass causes the rubber sheet to curve. The ‘2 dimensional’ rubber sheet represents the 3 spacial dimensions whereas, in reality, the ‘rubber sheet’ of space-time is 3 dimensional with the mass causing curvature into . . . ? Obviously, a fourth spacial dimension or at least one extra spacial dimension which we cannot enter (and often find difficult to comprehend or visualise).
As for the ‘residence’ of God, existing in dimensions outside of our 4D space-time dimensions fits with the scriptural description of God being outside of time (eternal) and everywhere (omnipresent).
Have a good day!
Still small
- Still small
- Apprentice
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am
- Location: Great South Land
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #93
Diagoras wrote: After reading the posts in this debate, I searched out Lawrence M. Krauss’ book, ‘A Universe From Nothing’ and found a free downloadable pdf copy. I’ve only had time to quickly browse a few chapters so far, but it seems to be an accessible explanation of some of the current theories surrounding the very beginning of the universe.
Something that I hadn’t appreciated before was the fact that our understanding of the universe has changed remarkably in a comparably short time. When Einstein was formulating his General Theory of Relativity to explain gravity, it was thought that the universe was static, and contained just one galaxy (our own). It wasn’t until Edwin Hubble proved that the distances to nebulae such as Andromeda were far too great to mean that they were in our galaxy, and subsequently discovered the ‘red shift’ of stars within other galaxies that led to an expanding universe being accepted.
Today, we’re grappling with all manner of equally new and baffling concepts, while at the same time, expanding our knowledge of things previously only hypothesised. We now have solid physical evidence for things like gravitational waves, the Higgs boson and black holes, rather than only mathematical models. We don’t yet fully understand ‘dark matter’ or ‘dark energy’, and we haven’t yet managed to join the theories of relativity (on the cosmological scale) to quantum theory on the sub-atomic scale. Lawrence Krauss covers a lot of this in the book. He makes the case that based on what we know, plus the track record of science being able to corroborate previous theories with strong physical evidence, the current explanations of the very beginning of the universe coming from ‘nothing’ and the ‘Big Bang’ inflation are in fact highly plausible.
I recommend downloading and reading the book first before casually dismissing the work of many people who have expanded our knowledge horizons.
What is Krauss’s definition of ‘nothing’? Is it nothing as in absolute non-existence or is it ‘nothing with something’, for example, energy or ‘particles’, etc? (‘Nothing with something’ is not really nothing.)
Have a good day!
Still small
- Aetixintro
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 918
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 3:18 am
- Location: Metropolitan-Oslo, Norway, Europe
- Has thanked: 431 times
- Been thanked: 27 times
- Contact:
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #94[Replying to post 1 by FWI]
Fact!
From the scientific God-theory and fantastic phenomena events for real, there is no doubt that the Earth has been created from "nothing". Way more plausible than an absurd "materialistic" version.
See my work on Fantastic Events in the World: "The Fantastic Phenomena or of Freak Nature as Accounts of Reality", https://www.facebook.com/notes/lukas-f- ... 606236984/
Resulting from a tedious rethinking of my extensive data-set that's also the Internet, of course! It's an expensive data-set. It has taken me a very long time to compile this listing. It's still not complete.
So, again, the Bible seems more right than the "Atheistic" scientists the World could ever bring about! IMO.
Note that Heaven, the God domain, and God with it, is extremely rich or infinite with energy. It's also uncertain what kind of status Heaven obtains in terms of physical matter. Opposite to the Devil who can create NOTHING at all!
Cheers!
Fact!
From the scientific God-theory and fantastic phenomena events for real, there is no doubt that the Earth has been created from "nothing". Way more plausible than an absurd "materialistic" version.
See my work on Fantastic Events in the World: "The Fantastic Phenomena or of Freak Nature as Accounts of Reality", https://www.facebook.com/notes/lukas-f- ... 606236984/
Resulting from a tedious rethinking of my extensive data-set that's also the Internet, of course! It's an expensive data-set. It has taken me a very long time to compile this listing. It's still not complete.
So, again, the Bible seems more right than the "Atheistic" scientists the World could ever bring about! IMO.
Note that Heaven, the God domain, and God with it, is extremely rich or infinite with energy. It's also uncertain what kind of status Heaven obtains in terms of physical matter. Opposite to the Devil who can create NOTHING at all!
Cheers!
I'm cool! - Stronger Religion every day! Also by "mathematical Religion", the eternal forms, God closing the door on corrupt humanity, possibly!
- Diagoras
- Guru
- Posts: 1388
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 580 times
Post #95
For anyone really interested in the answer to this, here’s a link to the free download pdf copy:Still small wrote:What is Krauss’s definition of ‘nothing’?
https://www.pdfdrive.com/a-universe-fro ... 92561.html
In the preface, Krauss addresses some of the theological and philosophical positions on “nothing�, noting that a hundred years ago, ‘empty space’ was good enough as a definition, before the concept of a quantum vacuum was developed. He provides a lot more detail on the concepts in Chapters 8 and 9, but it’s worth quoting this point from the preface to give you a sense of where the book is coming from:
<bolding mine>When it comes to understanding how our universe evolves, religion and philosophy have been at best irrelevant. They often muddy the waters, for example, by focussing on questions of nothingness without providing any definition of the term based on empirical evidence.
What the book does is describe actual scientific discoveries about the universe. A lot of these discoveries are challenging to many people. Krauss puts it like this:
While it may not answer your question, “what is nothing?� to your satisfaction, I hope you (and others) others will be sufficiently interested to explore Krauss’ book yourself.The results of experiments that I will describe here are not only timely, they are also unexpected. The tapestry that science weaves in describing the evolution of our universe is far richer and far more fascinating than any revelatory images or imaginative stories that humans have concocted. Nature comes up with surprises that far exceed those than the human imagination can generate.
- Diagoras
- Guru
- Posts: 1388
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 580 times
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #96[Replying to post 93 by Aetixintro]
From your link:
From your link:
Who are you referring to when you say this?Note:
I'm tired of hearing these no-knowledge idiots "managing information" for the sake of keeping people in depression!
I just don't take it anymore! That these morons are supposed to tell us what exists or not "based on what they feel is right!"
-
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25089
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #97.
Are you just making this up?
How does one learn so much about 'gods' and 'devils'? Would that be by reading tales by ancient preachers who claim to know? Listening to modern preachers who claim to know? Having psychological 'experiences'?
Kindly cite verifiable evidence to support the contention.
Is that a fact?Aetixintro wrote: Note that Heaven, the God domain, and God with it, is extremely rich or infinite with energy. It's also uncertain what kind of status Heaven obtains in terms of physical matter. Opposite to the Devil who can create NOTHING at all!
Are you just making this up?
How does one learn so much about 'gods' and 'devils'? Would that be by reading tales by ancient preachers who claim to know? Listening to modern preachers who claim to know? Having psychological 'experiences'?
Kindly cite verifiable evidence to support the contention.
.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2719
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1645 times
Post #98
[Replying to post 91 by Still small]
It is often invoked as an explanation for something we don't yet fully understand, or that science has yet to explain in every detail, but I know of not one instance where the supernatural has been shown to actually exist. Not one. So for that simple reason I don't believe that it does exist, but would change my mind if the situation changed. I just see no reason to believe that it will.
I don't at the present time ... simply because it has never been demonstrated to exist whether pertaining to gods, angels and devils, or anything else in the supernatural realm.So, do you accept the existence of the supernatural/metaphysical or not?
It is often invoked as an explanation for something we don't yet fully understand, or that science has yet to explain in every detail, but I know of not one instance where the supernatural has been shown to actually exist. Not one. So for that simple reason I don't believe that it does exist, but would change my mind if the situation changed. I just see no reason to believe that it will.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
- Diagoras
- Guru
- Posts: 1388
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 580 times
Post #99
[Replying to post 97 by DrNoGods]
After all, it’s not as if there hasn’t been a good incentive to prove it.
http://skepdic.com/randi.html
After all, it’s not as if there hasn’t been a good incentive to prove it.
http://skepdic.com/randi.html
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #100[Replying to post 93 by Aetixintro]
Sorry, but I disagree with this premise…Yet, this would depend on how you are applying the term: nothing. Thus, if you are suggesting that God waved His magic wand and formed the earth in one great stage, I do not consider that the event occurred, in this manner! The information given to man (about God) shows that God is detail orientated…So, we also need to consider the role that the celestial beings played in the final acts of the earth's and universe's creation and the life within them.
This understanding plays well with the opening two verses of Genesis 1.
Aetixintro wrote:From the scientific God-theory and fantastic phenomena events for real, there is no doubt that the Earth has been created from "nothing".
Sorry, but I disagree with this premise…Yet, this would depend on how you are applying the term: nothing. Thus, if you are suggesting that God waved His magic wand and formed the earth in one great stage, I do not consider that the event occurred, in this manner! The information given to man (about God) shows that God is detail orientated…So, we also need to consider the role that the celestial beings played in the final acts of the earth's and universe's creation and the life within them.
This comment is unrealistic and implies that the creation of millions (maybe billions) of celestial beings (angels) was meaningless, which would be impossible…Thus, it is my contention that the universe and all that is in it, was created for these celestial life forms, not for humans…And, they were given the ability to create life in many different forms, as well as, beautify the worlds assigned to them. However, for some, this ability to create was limited and eventually, curtailed completely. This can be understood through the dinosaur era and its extinction…Aetixintro wrote:It's also uncertain what kind of status Heaven obtains in terms of physical matter. Opposite to the Devil who can create NOTHING at all!
This understanding plays well with the opening two verses of Genesis 1.