Why is there something, rather than nothing ?

[DaveDodo007]

Nothing is unstable unless Victor Stenger is lying to me.

[Brian Peacock]

Here's one. If we take a defined space and empty it of everything, all matter, all particles and radiation etc, it still weighs something. Nothing equals something.

[JimC]

Here's one. If we take a defined space and empty it of everything, all matter, all particles and radiation etc, it still weighs something. Nothing equals something.

Maybe not. In the case you describe, there should only be "dark energy" left, which produces an effect opposite to gravity, meaning that it "weighs" less than something. Nothing is less than something...

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Here's one. If we take a defined space and empty it of everything, all matter, all particles and radiation etc...

Let me stop you there. How the fuck do you do that? Short answer, you can't. There is no such space and, with our current skill set, there is not going to be one in the foreseeable future. Especially given that we currently don't actually know the complete set of "particles and radiation etc" that we would need to remove.

Which brings me to the second part of your statement

...it still weighs something.

How the fuck do you figure that?

I await enlightenment with visible agogedness.

[mistermack]

It's a weird question, the something and nothing question.
The reason that it's so weird, is that like all imponderables that I can think of, it involves infinity.

"Something" is infinitely more than "nothing". And "Nothing" is an infinitely small quantity of "everything".

People say, if there is something, where did it come from? And of course, infinity jumps right in again.
Has there been something for an infinite time, or did it come from nothing, which is also infinite in it's nothingness.

When you talk about infinite time, that can only make sense, if "something" is infinitely old. Because, if there is "nothing", then time doesn't exist. Time is a property of "something". So saying "what happened before "something" existed is a nonsense.

I don't mean the Universe when I say "something". There obviously can be something in addition to what we think of as the Universe. Or could have been something, before the Universe "existed", or what we think of as existing.

But as soon as you get on to infinity, everything becomes impossible to comprehend.
Infinity might be easy to say, or write in maths, but other than that, it's a complete blank to us.
And it's perfectly possible that the human mind will never be able to understand it.

Here's one. If we take a defined space and empty it of everything, all matter, all particles and radiation etc, it still weighs something. Nothing equals something.

Maybe not. In the case you describe, there should only be "dark energy" left, which produces an effect opposite to gravity, meaning that it "weighs" less than something. Nothing is less than something...

I thought that Brian was referring to dark matter, which does weigh something, but is undetectable to us.
(so far).
Or have they found a bit? They're spending enough money trying.

[Brian Peacock]

Here's one. If we take a defined space and empty it of everything, all matter, all particles and radiation etc...

Let me stop you there. How the fuck do you do that? Short answer, you can't. There is no such space and, with our current skill set, there is not going to be one in the foreseeable future. Especially given that we currently don't actually know the complete set of "particles and radiation etc" that we would need to remove.

Which brings me to the second part of your statement

...it still weighs something.

How the fuck do you figure that?

I await enlightenment with visible agogedness.

Take it up with Larry Klauss -- it's pretty much a verbatim quote. I presumed that the maths figured out ok but perhaps I shouldn't be so quick to take particle and quantum physicists too literally.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Here's one. If we take a defined space and empty it of everything, all matter, all particles and radiation etc...

Let me stop you there. How the fuck do you do that? Short answer, you can't. There is no such space and, with our current skill set, there is not going to be one in the foreseeable future. Especially given that we currently don't actually know the complete set of "particles and radiation etc" that we would need to remove.

Which brings me to the second part of your statement

...it still weighs something.

How the fuck do you figure that?

I await enlightenment with visible agogedness.

Take it up with Larry Klauss -- it's pretty much a verbatim quote. I presumed that the maths figured out ok but perhaps I shouldn't be so quick to take particle and quantum physicists too literally.

Do you have a reference? I'd love to see which context you removed that from!

[Sean Hayden]

A Universe From Nothing, Chapter 4. Much Ado About Nothing, pg 58

-maybe somewhere else too, I haven't read it yet.

[Brian Peacock]

Here's one. If we take a defined space and empty it of everything, all matter, all particles and radiation etc...

Let me stop you there. How the fuck do you do that? Short answer, you can't. There is no such space and, with our current skill set, there is not going to be one in the foreseeable future. Especially given that we currently don't actually know the complete set of "particles and radiation etc" that we would need to remove.

Which brings me to the second part of your statement

...it still weighs something.

How the fuck do you figure that?

I await enlightenment with visible agogedness.

Take it up with Larry Klauss -- it's pretty much a verbatim quote. I presumed that the maths figured out ok but perhaps I shouldn't be so quick to take particle and quantum physicists too literally.

Do you have a reference? I'd love to see which context you removed that from!

From a c.30 min interview on youtube for Canadian public TV about his book. Away from PC at the mo but iirc the interviewer is wearing beige.

[JimC]

Beige?

Well, really...

[Sean Hayden]

A neutral color worn with the hope that one doesn't startle one's prey.

[Jason]

Is space-time separable from matter/energy?

[JimC]

Is space-time separable from matter/energy?

In some ways, that is the crux of the current dilemma in Physics. Einstein's General Relativity deals very well with space-time (except at a singularity), and quantum theory deals very effectively with matter/energy. However, the 2 theories do not play well together in situations where they intersect...

[mistermack]

I haven't read anything that Krausse wrote, but I've seen him on various youtube vid debates.

I don't like the way he pushes this big bang from nothing concept. He seems to enjoy saying it, for the dramatic effect, rather than any new insight into what actually happened.
I suppose it adds to his popularity, to associate himself with mind-blowing concepts. But really, there's no real evidence for or against it. General relativity breaks down when you try to apply it to the first few squillianths of a second of the big bang. So it's anybody's guess what went on.
And he shouts out this "a whole universe from literally nothing" phrase, without any attempt to describe what he means by literally nothing.
And as I said before, "literally nothing" actually means "infinitely nothing", and infinity just gives you ludicrous answers.
And not only is "literally nothing" an infinite nothing, but the creation of a single electron would be an infinite increase of energy. Because anything coming from nothing is an infinite increase.

Krausse makes no mention of these problems, and sort of gives the impression that this is accepted physics, which I don't believe it is.

[JimC]

mistermack wrote:

...Because anything coming from nothing is an infinite increase....

True in % terms, not true in absolute terms.