Quantum creation of an open universe from nothing
Discussion of the idea of creatio ex nihilo of the Universe via quantum creation.

Quantum creation of an open universe from nothing


Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2012

Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 90
#21 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Jul 17, 2012 - 10:52 PM:

andrewk wrote:
I will be very surprised if this correct. It is contrary to what I have read, some of it based on fairly recent papers. Can you give your reasons for this belief?

Sorry, was away. This came directly out of Krauss' book "An Universe from Nothing", so there are no links I can offer, and to be honest, I really need a second reading of the book and some further review of counterpoints to form an opinion.. IIRC, it seemed Krauss' interpretation of a flat but not open universe based on the CMB and input from others such as Alan Guth. When I get back about three weeks later, I'll check to see if this topic is still going on and see if I can jump in. I see in your later posts that physicists in another forum don't seem to agree on a Universe from Nothing - am I correct in that they are refering specifically to Krauss' book?
Inexhaustibly Curious

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Oct 13, 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia

Total Topics: 47
Total Posts: 5897

Last Blog: I think my spaceship knows which way to go

Avatar andrewk
#22 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Jul 18, 2012 - 1:23 AM:

I don't think they were necessarily saying the universe couldn't come out of nothing - by which I think they imagine some sort of quantum fluctuation - but just that Krauss's proposals about that were highly speculative. That's not to say he shouldn't speculate though. Like most people I enjoy a good bit of speculation and it sells books well.

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 07, 2011

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 19
#23 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Oct 7, 2012 - 6:56 PM:

Warshed wrote:
Stephen Hawkings seems to be a subscriber to this theory and so do a few other notable characters. I am not a physics major and I do not pretend to understand the theory or the practice of quantum mechanics, but I know there are probably people who do on this forum. I bring up this topic for exploration because I think it gets to the heart of the creation of our universe and therefore the meaning of our life without having to appeal to hire power like God. Basically, in laymans terms the quantum creation of the universe asserts that our universe errupted from a null state of energy by the polarizing of negative and positive energy in the universe. In other words the universe errupted out of nowhere from nothing but essentially doesn't have a positive or negative state, but rather a null state, but the distribution of negative and positive energy is balanced out in such a way that it allows for our universe to expand.

I have to correct the above upon further research. According to the theory, our universe wasn't created out of nothing, but rather errupted from a prior universe. In other words there is an eternal something that spawns universes.

I watched Stephen Hawking's Grand Design "Did God Create the Universe" on Discovery Science and he certainly did state the universe came from nothing. Matter and space were supposed to cancel out to nothing at the Big Bang.

This of course is nonsense since absolute nothing cannot be defined, nor imagined, and is therefore impossible.

Proof: If nothing was definable then it would not be nothing, but rather that which it was defined to be.

So the word nothing (or zero) has no more meaning than Hgj7yGGt6 and should not be used in text or even spoken about.

"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."
"What cannot be imagined cannot even be talked about."
― Ludwig Wittgenstein

Hawking's is wrong again and it's a similar mistake. In a bet with Preskill he claimed Hawking Radiation came from nothing but lost the bet.

Because absolute nothing is impossible then something must exist at all times.


Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 10, 2012

Total Topics: 39
Total Posts: 3775
#24 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Nov 12, 2012 - 2:42 AM:

There is a possible world in which all possible worlds cancel each other out. (I would suggest that this is a statement related to information distribution within some finite iteration of dimensions).
But in those all possible worlds there are also worlds where it is possible that they do not cancel each other out.
That is how I have taken to an understanding of "the universe from nothing" type arguments.
Obviously in our world, if it is amongst those all possible worlds, we can say that the canceling out is not possible relative to other possible worlds, and thus that we do not live in the "nothing" as our world.

Edited by m-theoryrules on Nov 13, 2012 - 12:30 AM

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Nov 13, 2012

Total Topics: 8
Total Posts: 26
#25 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Nov 13, 2012 - 9:36 PM:

This is pretty much an unending process it seems of cause and effect. I speculate as to whether or not its just an illusion we create, because no matter what we attempt to understand we pretty much just pose new questions. Its the will of people to know, and it seems peculiar that the border of knowledge is running away from us just fast enough so that were never quite at the end.

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Nov 14, 2012

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 57
#26 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Nov 14, 2012 - 2:56 AM:

Warshed wrote:

I have to correct the above upon further research. According to the theory, our universe wasn't created out of nothing, but rather errupted from a prior universe. In other words there is an eternal something that spawns universes.

It only makes sense that something that cannot be destroyed or created always existed. That is why I believe the universe always existed. I do not believe there to be an end or beginning but infinite mass and energy with massive space in between constantly in flux.

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 27, 2012

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 2
#27 - Quote - Permalink
Posted Nov 27, 2012 - 9:33 AM:

Krauss and Hawking are both expressing their speculative personal opinions on the whole Universe from nothing. They are trying to sell books and get good ratings on TV. They do physics an injustice when they dont put in a disclaimer " this is my personal opinion, not the general scientific consensus" . There is NOT a single scientific peer-reviewed article showing empirical evidence for a zero energy universe!! You can find theoretical papers solving the Friedmann-Walker Metric with zero energy but they have NO empirical evidence!

As stated earlier in this thread Krauss and other scientists use gravity as negative energy, which I too find very unsatisfactory and its good to hear other people do too. Its a relative quantity. And if the potential of gravity is negative so should the potential between to oppositely charged particles... end rant
Download thread as
  • 0/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

This thread is closed, so you cannot post a reply.