Krause's loaded "nothing", a new interview with the cosmology brat.

[Whateverist]

Space is already something, presumably something which did not exist before the bang grande. Unless of course you allow for a multiverse, a concept which Krause and others despise since it is -at least currently- unobservable by science. But how really do you understand Krause's idea of "nothing" apart from a multiverse?

Krause's idea of nothing does seem at least to interact with quantum 'foam' (whatever to hell that's supposed to mean). I've heard that Krause claims that the nothing the universe is said to come from is/could be a true nothing by way of being a quantum void. (I can't find the quote however so he may not have said this at all.) But does this make any sense at all to talk of a void existing simultaneously with with the mysterious quantum foam? Apart from the where which space provides, how can there be a division between the foam and the void? Apart from time how can they exist simultaneously? Mind boggling.

I object to Krause using 'nothing' to describe something which contains within itself the conditions necessary to give rise to everything. Nothing isn't supposed to have anything in it let alone the seeds for everything. He does seem to reign in this misappropriation of the word somewhat in this recent radio talk:


http://youtu.be/1DtVsX9cP6c

[Minimalist]

I'm reading it now.

[Whateverist]

I'm reading it now.

I may have to break down and read this sucker myself.

[Angrboda]

I think it's above my pay grade.

[Whateverist]

I think it's above my pay grade.

Mine too of course but I have a problem with authority.

[Rayaan]

I object to Krause using 'nothing' to describe something which contains within itself the conditions necessary to give rise to everything.

Yeah, the "nothing" that he talks about is not actually nothing in the true meaning of the word. At a quantum level, we know that space is filled with energy and is seething with things like virtual particles, quarks, gluons, quantum field fluctuations, fleeting electromagnetic waves and particles that pop into and out of existence, etc. And all these things are not "nothing."

I also posted a video on this in another thread which explains the things that occur in a quantum vacuum (or so-called "empy space"):

Empty Space is Not Actually Empty

[Odysseus]

Yeah I heard about it already. To be honest not sure what to think not because I doubt vacuum fluctuations per se, but because I feel that though philosophy is mostly shit nowadays for the best minds, it seemed to coevolve with mathematics knowledge just like religious fervor/meaning because of that I am not so sure we should despise it though I may be conflating, but I don't think so

[Whateverist]

Yeah I heard about it already. To be honest not sure what to think not because I doubt vacuum fluctuations per se, but because I feel that though philosophy is mostly shit nowadays for the best minds, it seemed to coevolve with mathematics knowledge just like religious fervor/meaning because of that I am not so sure we should despise it though I may be conflating, but I don't think so

Mine is a love/hate relationship with philosophy. I have to love it because that's my orientation to the world. But the breadth of bullshit which passes under that name always makes me suspicious. Plain talk is always more comfortable for me. Avoid jargon and authoritative references and you might get through it okay.

[Neo-Scholastic]

To me the same ancient wisdom still applies: Out of nothing, nothing comes.

[Whateverist]

To me the same ancient wisdom still applies: Out of nothing, nothing comes.

That may well be true. But it turns out that nothing is a lot harder to find than the ancients thought. An empty room isn't nothing. Empty space isn't nothing. Even a vacuum isn't nothing. It may well be the case that there has never been "nothing" in any absolute sense. But then you know that, because you think God has always existed.