Philosophy Now Forum

The more I think about it the more I realize that you have this the wrong way round. A universe from something makes more sense. A universe from nothing makes no sense at all and I am sure Krauss knows this. But a God from nothing totally makes sense, yea? As soon as you allow for "First Cause...

Most of what we have been talking about is immaterial now you know that Krauss is NOT postulating a universe from nothing. Well, Krauss is irrelevant, you mean. What we've seen is that his theory doesn't give us a universe from nothing, so all he's done is speculate one additional causal step backw...

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:30 am Recent exchanges between Immanuel Can and Ginkgo are interesting and I wonder what God's agency in the creation of nature has to do with right and wrong.

Probably nothing.
I get the impression that you are a pantheist.

I think you have a aversion to quantum mechanics because it postulates no need for a first cause. Even were that true, it's immaterial. The only question is whether or not what I'm saying is true, not who wants it to be true. Because the alternative is recognizing that a First Cause is inescapable,...

For Immanuel Can

I did a Google search for "A Universe From Nothing" and found a lecture by Lawrence Krauss on this very topic. It is as I thought, Krasuss is talking about a universe from something, not a universe from nothing.

That we agree to call a "something" a "nothing," and that we imagine his theory is a sort of truth. It's just a speculation, after all, and one not even amenable to scientific testing. We could call it, at most, a very preliminary intuition, so we don't owe it much credence...at...

Well, I don't think we "see" any such thing. We have no reason to grant Krauss's "basis," since it's just untrue. What basis might that be? I also understand that there are at least 10 different speculative quantum models that are currently being floated. It looks like somebody ...

On this basis we can see that nothing is really something. Well, I don't think we "see" any such thing. We have no reason to grant Krauss's "basis," since it's just untrue. I also understand that there are at least 10 different speculative quantum models that are currently being...

Taken this way it is possible to see that such a universe can begin from nothing. As I said before, I haven't read the book so I am only guessing. Well, that's not quite Lawrence Krauss's proposed 'solution.' His requires a "something" to be called a "nothing." I tend to agree t...

I can't really comment on Albert's criticism of Krauss because I haven't read his book. I thought the title sounded interesting. Well, yes; but the dangers of such loose, sensationalist titles is that they seem to promise something that the author just does not deliver. And yet a non-reader of the ...

Funny you should say this, Lawrence Krauss wrote a book called 'A Universe From Nothing." Within the quantum world causality does go out the window. However, apparently Krauss doesn't actually posit a "nothing" at all. The title's a fake, really. He's promising what he doesn't even t...

A quantum state is not a "nothing." Well, I did say except for a quantum state. However, I take your point, I should have chosen my words a little more carefully. So even if we postulate just that, we get a "something" that needs explanation. Why that "something" behav...

WHY do you think its a problem ? In order for God to have created the Universe it has to be finite An infinite Universe removes the need for any creator and so cannot be accepted So his objection is therefore metaphysical rather than scientific or mathematical An infinite God is causeless and so co...

Don't forget, the Big Bang was not an explosion, it was an expansion...Remember? An explosion occurs in space while an expansion is the creation of space. The BB is not actually the creation of space. The theory holds that "things" existed prior to the BB, such as gases and plasma. So it'...

Everything is moving away from everything else; the outer most galaxies are moving way from us faster than the speed of light. The best calculations so far point to a universe that will expand for ever. A ray, a line with a definite starting point and an infinite trajectory, is not an empirical imp...