Lifestyle A Universe From Nothing Book


Monday, June 17, 2019

Buy A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing on ✓ FREE SHIPPING on This is a brilliant and disarming book. A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing is a non- fiction book by the physicist Lawrence M. Krauss, initially published on January. Despite exploring these difficult concepts, "A Universe from Nothing" doesn't read like a typical science book. It's more like a detective book, with Krauss.

Language:English, Spanish, Portuguese
Country:South Sudan
Published (Last):22.10.2015
ePub File Size:22.55 MB
PDF File Size:10.77 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Uploaded by: WENDOLYN

A Universe from Nothing book. Read reviews from the world's largest community for readers. En este libro se explica de forma sencilla y apasionada. A Universe From Nothing: Why there is something rather than nothing As Krauss's insightful book shows, these days we really can talk with. 'A Universe From Nothing,' by Lawrence M. Krauss in this new book, that the laws of quantum mechanics have in them the makings of a.

Frequently bought together

Although the event featured lots of witty banter, it ended up being more frustrating than fun. Wright an old friend, with whom I have sparred on his internet show Bloggingheads.

In , the Russian physicist Andrei Linde assured me that our entire cosmos—as well as an infinite number of other universes—might have sprung from a primordial "quantum fluctuation. But Krauss asks us to take the quantum theory of creation seriously, and so does evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is comparing the most enduringly profound scientific treatise in history to a pop-science book that recycles a bunch of stale ideas from physics and cosmology. This absurd hyperbole says less about the merits of Krauss's derivative book than it does about the judgment-impairing intensity of Dawkins's hatred of religion.

Krauss and I then had an exchange in the comments section of my blog [see Postscript below]. But what do I know?

Book Review: A Universe From Nothing

Newton, for example, took that elementary stuff to consist of material particles. And so on. And what the fundamental laws of nature are about, and all the fundamental laws of nature are about, and all there is for the fundamental laws of nature to be about, insofar as physics has ever been able to imagine, is how that elementary stuff is arranged.

But the laws have no bearing whatsoever on questions of where the elementary stuff came from, or of why the world should have consisted of the particular elementary stuff it does, as opposed to something else, or to nothing at all. The fundamental physical laws that Krauss is talking about in A Universe From Nothing--the laws of relativistic quantum field theories--are no exception to this. The particular, eternally persisting, elementary physical stuff of the world, according to the standard presentations of relativistic quantum field theories, consists unsurprisingly of relativistic quantum fields.

Case closed. So in fact as my late friend Christopher Hitchens, who was writing the forward for the book before he passed away, used to say: Nothing is heading towards us as fast as it can. So another answer to the question why is there something rather than nothing is just wait. Here's a tweet from Maggie Kelley ph , who says: So if space is infinitely expanding, what is it expanding into?

It's a question people often ask. And the answer is it doesn't need to expand into anything. The only two ways I know to try and explain this - well, the simplest way perhaps is to think of a rubber bedsheet that's infinitely big.

Now stretch it. It's now bigger, but it wasn't expanding into anything because it was already infinitely big. Now, if you don't like infinities, and there's a good reason to not be comfortable with infinities, just think of a balloon, and of course when you blow up a balloon, you think, sure, it's expanding into the room, but that's because you've embedded this two-dimensional surface of a balloon into this three-dimensional space. But if the two-dimensional surface of the balloon was all there was, as it expanded, the balloon would get bigger, and every dot on that balloon, if you painted dots on that balloon, would move away from every other dot, but it wouldn't be expanding into anything, it would just be getting bigger.

So our universe, in fact, doesn't need to expand into anything. Space can expand on its own, whether the universe is finite or infinite, without boundary and without expanding into anything. I'll make it quick. I was just wondering if - are some ideas being investigated in space-time recently, in terms of the Higgs field and the Higgs Boson, are these in some way kind of a revisiting of the idea of aluminiferous ether, as they used to talk about?

I know there's differences, but is this kind of ether revisited now? In a kind of philosophical sense, yes. Both the Higgs field and this dark energy that's permeating everything are indeed permeating empty space.

And in that sense empty space is - has properties that you would not otherwise imagine, just like we - they used to imagine as an ether. Of course, a difference was the ether was thought to be necessary to propagate light, and it was also thought to create a special frame of reference, and neither of these things do that. So neither of these things are of ether. But in a philosophical sense they hearken back to the idea that empty space is full of something. You mentioned in your book that we are lucky to be living in this time in the universe.

One is in the far future, and by the far future I mean hundreds of billions of years, astronomers and radio hosts on planets around other stars will look out at the universe, and what they'll see is the universe we thought we lived in years ago, all of the other galaxies will have disappeared expect for our own, and people will assume, or beings will assume, they live in a universe that's basically infinite, dark and empty except for one galaxy, with no evidence of the Big Bang.

So we're living at this rare cosmic instant in which we're lucky enough to observe the Big Bang. By rare - by cosmic instant I mean a few hundred billion years, but in a cosmic sense that's an instant. And so we're fortunate to be able to see that. At the same time, of course, it should give us some cosmic humility because it suggests - it indicates something that's very important to realize.

When you're talking about the whole universe, we're limited by what we can see because science is an empirical discipline, and we have to be able - and the universe continues to surprise us, and it only can surprise us if we can measure it. And we're stuck in one universe, and we're stuck at the time we live in, And moreover, in even a grander sense, when one talks about a universe that could easily have come into existence by accident, I even show how current theory suggests maybe even the laws of physics themselves came into being by accident, with no purpose, no design, you might get depressed.

But from my point of view, it's really exciting and should energize us because it suggests that we're unbelievably fortunate that we happen to live in a universe that not only supports life but that consciousness has evolved, and we can appreciate this remarkable universe around us, and we should make the moment - most of our brief moment in the sun. We should provide the meaning of the universe in the meaning of our own lives.

So I think science doesn't necessarily have to get in the way of kind of spiritual fulfillment. In fact, I would argue the real story of the universe is far more interesting than any myths or fairy tales that people wrote thousands of years before they even knew the Earth went around the sun. Hi, welcome. JOHN: Thank you. Yeah, I just had a comment. I thought maybe it would be a better idea to call it God's glue rather than dark matter, just to comment.

‘A Universe From Nothing,’ by Lawrence M. Krauss

I put it a slightly different way. The universe is the way it is whether you like it or not. And you can call it whatever you want, but - and you might - and scientists might want something, and religious people might want something too.

And I think the great difference and the great wonder of science is that our faith is shakable, not unshakable, that if we discover the universe isn't the way we wanted it to be, well, too bad. In fact, we learn to like it even better. Gary in Groveland, California.

Hi, Gary. GARY: Hi, thank you for taking my call. What is it doing for us today or even in the very near future? And I put it back to you. I'd say, well, what does a Bach cantata or a Picasso painting do for us?

I think the point is we are human beings, and one of the most wonderful aspect of being human beings is being creative and asking questions and trying to understand our place in the universe. And it is absolutely true that understanding the beginning and end of the universe is not going to produce a better toaster. But I'm always amazed that people - for me, one of the great virtues of science is it's a cultural activity, like art and literature and music.

A Universe from Nothing?

It enhances the experience of being human, and it addresses the questions that I'm sure you've asked about your own existence. And if we can get new insights into our own existence and our place in the cosmos, well, that's what happens when we attend a good play or see a good painting.

It gives us a new perspective of our place in the universe. And I happen to think that is worth it for its own sake. Plus, I happen to think these ideas are among the most remarkable and astounding ideas human beings have ever come up with. And we owe it to - we scientists owe it to the people to try and explain what's happening, and I think they enhance the quality of our existence. I think that's what is really important. Now, of course, there are always side benefits of doing - of every time we build a new big machine like the Large Hadron Collider and push the limits of technology, we develop tools that later on are used in society.

But I don't think we should justify this remarkable adventure just because of the side effects. Why is there a universe at all? What, then, do we have to complain about? In a word: no. Sometimes physicists pretend that they are addressing these questions, which is too bad, because they are just being lazy and not thinking carefully about the problem.

You might hear, for example, claims to the effect that our laws of physics could turn out to be the only conceivable laws, or the simplest possible laws. But that seems manifestly false. Just within the framework of quantum mechanics, there are an infinite number of possible Hilbert spaces, and an infinite number of possibile Hamiltonians, each of which defines a perfectly legitimate set of physical laws.

The universe could be just a single point, not evolving in time. Or it could be a single oscillator, rocking back and forth in perpetuity. Those would be very simple. And in any case, we would then have the question of why the laws are supposed to be simple? Why are all possible laws real? And sometimes, on the other hand, modern cosmologists talk about different laws of physics in the context of a multiverse, and suggest that we see one set of laws rather than some other set for fundamentally anthropic reasons.

We are still left with the question of there are those deep-down laws that create a multiverse in the first place.Second, there is some particular state representing the universe at some time, typically taken to be the present.

He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!

A Universe From Nothing

A few quotes from the book: This may eventually be the case, but it is not so now. Those things are worth celebrating. Richard Dawkins.

String theory says there may be as many as universes with 10 dimensions, 4 of which are large like ours.

LEOMA from Oklahoma
Browse my other posts. I am highly influenced by football. I do enjoy exploring ePub and PDF books clearly .