This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← 'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Jump to comment 10 by God fearing Atheist

The video is very interesting, but why the repeat posting?

Click on the RDF Productions on the horizontal menu bar under the banner, then AAI 2009 conference (10th row), and its linked on 2nd row, 1st column. There has also been an discussion (like this) before.

Comment 3 by Schrodinger's Cat :

Comment 2 by Michael Gray

How do you know that?

Simple logic. If absolute nothing can turn into something, then it can't have been absolute nothing as the total absence of anything at all would mean the total absense of any reason for nothing to turn into something.

That philosophical mindwank. Its the drivel left over from a pre-scientific era when philosophers tried to do though experiments using the results from the LHC hundreds of years before it was even built. Philosophers trying to do doing metaphysics, i.e. the physics of physics, or ontology, classifying all there is, is a complete joke when done by ignoramuses who didn't even know what an electron is.

Philosophical nothing is a concept pulled out of a scientifically ignorant philosophers arse. There is a branch of philosophy that was called natural philosophy that is now called science. It now does the physics of physics, and classifies all of reality. It's rather good at it. It produces computer chips, and the LHC. If physicists have a definition of the word nothing then that is the only sensible natural philosophical definition to use. But, as Lawrence Krauss keeps saying, the definitions are actually maths, so the word nothing will only ever be used to construct common language stories and analogies to explain physics to lay audiences.

Only people like William Lang Craig think the 500 BC version of the word "nothing" is still useful.

Sun, 17 Jul 2011 11:32:38 UTC | #850393