The Universe Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

Post Reply New Topic

Another aspect that you might want to consider. The science and technology already exists to feed everyone on the planet and to give healthcare to everyone so the majority live to a ripe old age. What is lacking is the political will to make this happen. 5% of the problems associated with disease, starvation and poverty can be solved with science and technology but 95% of the problems preventing this from happening are political.

I'm with the pure science guys on this . . . the implications of today's science aren't known, but that doesn't mean there won't be any. Knowledge and exploration are key to our progress as a civilization.

Getting back to the original post ...

The proof apparently starts with present physical phenomena, and works backwards towards a "big Bang origin".

My first thought was that to do this they would have to presume determinism to mathematically prove such a backward linkage. Having spent some time on WP, arguing for determinism on other forums, I find it interesting that the article uses something I never heard before of David Bohm's "quantum potential" theory of QM, so that QM can be viewed as deterministic.

The article mentions that this is a controversial theory, so it seems like many scientists will have a problem with this proof. The physicists who I have conversed with here never mentioned such a deterministic interpretation of QM, and based on the QM-is-probabilistic-states research going on at universities; it seems *very, very* controversial.

Any thoughts on this ? It sounds like the proof relies on a discredited theory, because determinism is necessary to make such backward linkage ?

Thank you, I am exceptionally interested.

==============================

Edit: Also, I take issue with the author on this paragraph:

"At the heart of their thinking is Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. This allows a small empty space to come into existence probabilistically due to fluctuations in what physicists call the metastable false vacuum".

I fail to see any connection between the HUP which is a mathematical relationship, and the creation of probabilistic particles. The author possibly is missing some detail.

The black hole was my navel, the universe sprang out of it and into existence in a quantum observation event when I gazed at it too long.

AspieOtaku: it amuses me when someone mocks the irrationality of religious 'skydaddies' after explaining how a magically scientific blackhole ' skydaddy' is somehow rational.

Well? we know black holese exist and have observed them through a telescope they suck in galaxies stars planets and light nothing can escape a black hole that we know of and we do not know what is on the other side my guess possibly another universe forming. There is no magical invisible man doing it a god cannot be observed or proven its existence religion is only a few thousand years old while the universe we live in is around 14 billion years old. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMUDXO4xkW8[/youtube]

That's the funny part... It's your guess! How is your guess anymore educated than someone who believes in sky daddies?
I have read several articles that show that it is probable that information and radiation DO escape from an event horizon and that a black hole will eventually dissipate.

Black holes are misunderstood creatures. If you placed a black hole with the mass of the sun at the center of the solar system, the planets would simply orbit around it. They do not suck anything into them unless said objects are too close; a black hole has no more mass than whatever objects it has devoured.

Furthermore, there's a limit to how much a black hole can suck in at a time. Too much, and we'll have a quasar that spews out matter.

Common sense says that black holes evaporate (or in some cases, they're devoured by larger black holes). This shouldn't even be up for debate.

This is splitting hairs. The universe itself is an abstraction we use to describe everything that exists (from elementary particles to galaxies--to time and space).



Since virtual particles always appear in pairs (one virtual particle and one virtual anti-particle)--and always anhilate each other if left undisturbed, there's really nothing that indicates multiple universes.



All the more reason not to support the multiverse theory. If (and that's a big if) there was a "here and now" before the Big Bang, it was probably very confined.



If they can't interact, then I'm going with Occam's Razor. The meaning of a true vacuum, is that there's nothingness, but in the sense that nothingness actually is something (eg. the sum of one positive and one negative integer with the same absolute value). If there's no time and space without the universe, and no "outside" the universe, then we do not need the multiverse theory, even though we can't rule it out completely either.

If nothing created one universe, is it far fetched to state that it created many other universes as well, maybe even an infinite number of them?

And if nothing could create a universe- just think what SOMEthing could do!

One stray bottlecap from this universe might spawn a dozen universes!

I think it is important that subjects like this are discussed; blackhole behaviors are far removed from common sense.
AspieOtakus misunderstanding of the behavior of blackholes led him to surmise that they are the the cause of reality. He had in effect made a creation myth out of this misunderstanding and then mocked the misunderstanding of our ancestors and their own creation myths.
When creation myths become religions then people will kill, often and with zeal to defend these misunderstandings.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" addresses this very succinctly, in it he rues the death of basic science research in a world driven by profit and outcomes.

Also Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow address the advent of universe's in "The Grand Design" its just a shame that all most people know of the book is the last paragraph.

Then there is Rainbow Gravity