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
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 14192
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 912 times
- Been thanked: 1644 times
- Contact:
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #61@1
FWI: So, what do you say about the claim that our universe came from nothing?
William: It is a silly and therefore an unreasonable belief for me to adopt.
dio9: Before there was a physical universe there was a prime force which started it. A cause of which the universe is the effect. John wrote in the beginning was the word , logos. reasoning mind, Causing the immaterial to became material., analogous to light becoming sugar through photosynthesis. How could the original light have been generated? There has to be some kind of original give and take.
William: I agree except for the belief that 'the material' was created from 'the immaterial', as to me, that is simply another way of claiming that nothing created something.
Which is to say that 'The Immaterial' has to be thought of as some unknown type of material.
My guess is that it is known, but not understood well enough in that context. It is what scientists refer to as "The Quantum Field"
Theist have some vague idea about that Field, which equates to The MU...Christians...or at least Jesus... refers to this as "The Kingdom of Heaven".
Jagella: To say that the universe "came from nothing" does seem to defy common sense.
William: Agreed.
Jagella: Empirically we experience things coming from something rather than nothing.
William: Agreed. Bearing in mind we are experiencing it from the perspective of being within it...it is obvious therefore, everything about it, comes from something....something undefinable from our perspective. Common sense informs us whatever that might be, surely has to exist.
Jagella: However, the big bang was not a "common" event, and therefore common sense doesn't apply well.
William: As far as events go, effectively "The Big Bang" is still happening, and will do so until the end of its reach is discovered.
As it is, we are all relatively situated near its birth, as it were.
Therefore it can be reasonably argued that the ripple effect of TBB is as much an uncommon occurrence as the BB itself still is...Nevertheless here we all are discussing it, as if it were 'common'.
Jagella: As far as I know nobody has ever demonstrated that something cannot come from nothing.
William: Not from our particular place within it, no. I would suppose though, that from a perspective outside of it, one could argue that yes indeed, something appeared to result from 'nothing' - or rather - from whatever was reacting to whatever was making it react.
That something is a 'mystery'...but it is not 'nothing'.
Jagella: So I think a "universe from nothing" is very possible.
William: So I think it is a reasonable conclusion to allow for the possibility that "Something from Nothing" isn't possible.
FWI: So, what do you say about the claim that our universe came from nothing?
William: It is a silly and therefore an unreasonable belief for me to adopt.
dio9: Before there was a physical universe there was a prime force which started it. A cause of which the universe is the effect. John wrote in the beginning was the word , logos. reasoning mind, Causing the immaterial to became material., analogous to light becoming sugar through photosynthesis. How could the original light have been generated? There has to be some kind of original give and take.
William: I agree except for the belief that 'the material' was created from 'the immaterial', as to me, that is simply another way of claiming that nothing created something.
Which is to say that 'The Immaterial' has to be thought of as some unknown type of material.
My guess is that it is known, but not understood well enough in that context. It is what scientists refer to as "The Quantum Field"
Theist have some vague idea about that Field, which equates to The MU...Christians...or at least Jesus... refers to this as "The Kingdom of Heaven".
Jagella: To say that the universe "came from nothing" does seem to defy common sense.
William: Agreed.
Jagella: Empirically we experience things coming from something rather than nothing.
William: Agreed. Bearing in mind we are experiencing it from the perspective of being within it...it is obvious therefore, everything about it, comes from something....something undefinable from our perspective. Common sense informs us whatever that might be, surely has to exist.
Jagella: However, the big bang was not a "common" event, and therefore common sense doesn't apply well.
William: As far as events go, effectively "The Big Bang" is still happening, and will do so until the end of its reach is discovered.
As it is, we are all relatively situated near its birth, as it were.
Therefore it can be reasonably argued that the ripple effect of TBB is as much an uncommon occurrence as the BB itself still is...Nevertheless here we all are discussing it, as if it were 'common'.
Jagella: As far as I know nobody has ever demonstrated that something cannot come from nothing.
William: Not from our particular place within it, no. I would suppose though, that from a perspective outside of it, one could argue that yes indeed, something appeared to result from 'nothing' - or rather - from whatever was reacting to whatever was making it react.
That something is a 'mystery'...but it is not 'nothing'.
Jagella: So I think a "universe from nothing" is very possible.
William: So I think it is a reasonable conclusion to allow for the possibility that "Something from Nothing" isn't possible.
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #62Our universe didn't come from nothing, it consists of nothing. Positive energy in the form of matter is exactly canceled out by its negative energy in the form of gravity. If you take all the positive energy in the form of matter (1) and subtract all the negative energy in the form of gravity (-1) you have 1-1=0! Nothing! Something didn't come from nothing! Nothing is still nothing!FWI wrote: 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?
-
Still small
- Apprentice
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am
- Location: Great South Land
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #63
Artie wrote:Our universe didn't come from nothing, it consists of nothing. Positive energy in the form of matter is exactly canceled out by its negative energy in the form of gravity. If you take all the positive energy in the form of matter (1) and subtract all the negative energy in the form of gravity (-1) you have 1-1=0! Nothing! Something didn't come from nothing! Nothing is still nothing!
What was the ‘something’ which caused the ‘nothing’ to become “Positive energy in the form of matter� and “negative energy in the form of gravity�?
Also, in quantum physics, a quantum fluctuation produces both a ‘virtual particle’ and ‘virtual antiparticle’ which recombine, annihilating each other. The length time of existence between the fluctuation and annihilation is inversely proportional to the mass of the particles. Therefore, if we have a fluctuation which produced the initial singularity which resulted in the entire mass of the universe, it’s length of existence would be ‘zip’.
Have a good day!
Still small
Post #64
We have a fluctuation ending up with positive energy in the form of matter and negative energy in the form of gravity and together they equal zero and thus can last indefinitely. Your sentence "if we have a fluctuation which produced the initial singularity which resulted in the entire mass of the universe, it’s length of existence would be ‘zip’." should read: "If we have a fluctuation which produced the initial singularity which resulted in the entire mass of the universe AND GRAVITY, it's length of existence could be indefinite."Still small wrote:What was the ‘something’ which caused the ‘nothing’ to become “Positive energy in the form of matter� and “negative energy in the form of gravity�?Artie wrote:Our universe didn't come from nothing, it consists of nothing. Positive energy in the form of matter is exactly canceled out by its negative energy in the form of gravity. If you take all the positive energy in the form of matter (1) and subtract all the negative energy in the form of gravity (-1) you have 1-1=0! Nothing! Something didn't come from nothing! Nothing is still nothing!
Also, in quantum physics, a quantum fluctuation produces both a ‘virtual particle’ and ‘virtual antiparticle’ which recombine, annihilating each other. The length time of existence between the fluctuation and annihilation is inversely proportional to the mass of the particles. Therefore, if we have a fluctuation which produced the initial singularity which resulted in the entire mass of the universe, it’s length of existence would be ‘zip’.
Have a good day!
Still small
-
mgb
- Guru
- Posts: 1669
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
- Location: Europe
- Has thanked: 10 times
- Been thanked: 21 times
Post #65
If there is a fluctuation there is an event but there cannot be an event in nothingness because that would be something. In reality there is the eternal void, which is something, but the void becomes differentiated. This is creation. In reality, the void (God) emerges from mere existence into life and being. An artist starts off with a plain canvas and unformed paint. But a painting emerges. Nothing new has been created in terms of substance but something new has been created in terms of form.
Post #66
Not in nothingness, in quantum foam. "perhaps we're all awash in a wavy, rippling, undulating, foamy spacetime sea. Like ocean lather, like spit from the mouth of God."mgb wrote: If there is a fluctuation there is an event but there cannot be an event in nothingness because that would be something. In reality there is the eternal void, which is something, but the void becomes differentiated. This is creation. In reality, the void (God) emerges from mere existence into life and being. An artist starts off with a plain canvas and unformed paint. But a painting emerges. Nothing new has been created in terms of substance but something new has been created in terms of form.
https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/space ... antum-foam
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 14192
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 912 times
- Been thanked: 1644 times
- Contact:
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #67@62
Artie: Our universe didn't come from nothing, it consists of nothing.
William: Oxymoron. The word "consists" relates to something.
Nothing would not "consist" of anything.
Artie: Positive energy in the form of matter is exactly canceled out by its negative energy in the form of gravity. If you take all the positive energy in the form of matter (1) and subtract all the negative energy in the form of gravity (-1) you have 1-1=0!
William: You are describing a whole lot of nothing as if it were something!
Artie: Nothing! Something didn't come from nothing! Nothing is still nothing!
William:
So nothing came from something...?
Artie: Our universe didn't come from nothing, it consists of nothing.
William: Oxymoron. The word "consists" relates to something.
Nothing would not "consist" of anything.
Artie: Positive energy in the form of matter is exactly canceled out by its negative energy in the form of gravity. If you take all the positive energy in the form of matter (1) and subtract all the negative energy in the form of gravity (-1) you have 1-1=0!
William: You are describing a whole lot of nothing as if it were something!
Artie: Nothing! Something didn't come from nothing! Nothing is still nothing!
William:
So nothing came from something...?Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #681-1=0 Even though you have a 1 (matter) and a -1 (gravity) the sum total is still zero. Nothing. 1-1 is just a different way of saying zero. Nothing. The universe is just a different way of expressing zero energy. Nothing. No energy.
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 14192
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 912 times
- Been thanked: 1644 times
- Contact:
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #69Artie: Our universe didn't come from nothing, it consists of nothing.
William: Oxymoron. The word "consists" relates to something.
Nothing would not "consist" of anything.
Artie:The universe is just a different way of expressing zero energy. Nothing. No energy.
William:Nothing would not "consist" of something.
"The Universe" is "something".
"No Energy" still = "Something" Otherwise one would have no thing in which to argue for the non- existence of.
Saying that the Universe does not exist because 'something' and 'nothing' cancel each other out...is oxymoron.
Rather, the Universe exists because "Something + Something = something"
William: Oxymoron. The word "consists" relates to something.
Nothing would not "consist" of anything.
Artie:The universe is just a different way of expressing zero energy. Nothing. No energy.
William:Nothing would not "consist" of something.
"The Universe" is "something".
"No Energy" still = "Something" Otherwise one would have no thing in which to argue for the non- existence of.
Saying that the Universe does not exist because 'something' and 'nothing' cancel each other out...is oxymoron.
Rather, the Universe exists because "Something + Something = something"
Re: A Universe from Nothing…
Post #70No it isn't anymore than the number 1 in 1-1=0 is "something". 1-1 is still nothing.William wrote:William:Nothing would not "consist" of something.
"The Universe" is "something".
LOL never said that. The amount of energy in the universe is zero. Nothing. The universe is just nothing expressed as matter (+1) and gravity (-1) like 1-1 is a different way of expressing zero. Nothing. You don't go from nothing to something just by expressing nothing as 1-1. You don't create something from nothing, you just express nothing as 1-1. You still got zero. Nothing.Saying that the Universe does not exist because 'something' and 'nothing' cancel each other out...is oxymoron.
