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


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

Schrodinger's Cat's Avatar Jump to comment 14 by Schrodinger's Cat

Comment 12 by Peter Grant

Nothing is an abstract concept, a bit like infinity. Neither can be proven to exist beyond all doubt, but they are still useful as concepts. When you have what seems to be nothingness there are no apparent reasons left to expect logic to effectively describe its behaviour.

I'm not really concerned so much about arguments for 'creation ex nihilo''s the presentation of the science and the language used that concerns me.

The point being that many a time you'll hear a believer state ' science agrees that the universe was created from nothing '.......which of course leaves room for God to have done the 'ex nihilo' bit. That believer fallacy arises solely because of the language used. Such language plays right into the hands of believers. There's nothing they like more than the universe being created 'from nothing'.

The universe clearly wasn't created from absolutely nothing. Scientists should stop implying so by using shoddy language. If the universe began with a vacuum fluctuation, then scientists should say ' the universe began with a vacuum fluctuation '...which isn't 'nothing'.

Sun, 17 Jul 2011 12:17:41 UTC | #850404