Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can Quantum Mechanics Produce a Universe from Nothing?
www.apologeticspress.org ^ | 2/1/2013 | Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

Posted on 07/18/2013 10:36:09 AM PDT by kimtom

According to the First Law of Thermodynamics, nothing in the Universe (i.e., matter or energy) can pop into existence from nothing (see Miller, 2013). All of the scientific evidence points to that conclusion. So, the Universe could not have popped into existence before the alleged “big bang” (an event which we do not endorse). Therefore, God must have created the Universe.

One of the popular rebuttals by the atheistic community is that quantum mechanics could have created the Universe. In 1905, Albert Einstein proposed the idea of mass-energy equivalence, resulting in the famous equation, E = mc2 (1905). We now know that matter can be converted to energy, and vice versa. However, energy and mass are conserved, in keeping with the First Law. In the words of the famous evolutionary astronomer, Robert Jastrow, “[T]he principle of the conservation of matter and energy…states that matter and energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Matter can be converted into energy, and vice versa, but the total amount of all matter and energy in the Universe must remain unchanged forever” (1977, p. 32). The idea of matter-energy conversion led one physicist to postulate, in essence, that the cosmic egg that exploded billions of years ago in the alleged “big bang”—commencing the “creation” of the Universe—could have come into existence as an energy-to-matter conversion.

In 1973, physicist Edward Tryon of the Hunter College of the City University of New York published a paper in the British science journal Nature titled, “Is the Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation?” He proposed the idea that the Universe could be a large scale ........

(Excerpt) Read more at apologeticspress.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: astronomy; belongsinreligion; notanewstopic; notasciencetopic; physics; quantummechanics; science; sourcetitlenoturl; space
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last

1 posted on 07/18/2013 10:36:09 AM PDT by kimtom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kimtom

Yes you can, the tricky part is finding the shovel that can dig matter out of space time and leave a hole called gravity.....


2 posted on 07/18/2013 10:41:15 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom; All

The Steady-State theory has been shredded. The universe has not always existed.

Multiple cosmologists (like Avi Loeb at Harvard Univerity) say that the universe had a beginning and will come to an end.

Now, as to that beginning:

1.) did the universe come from prexisting matter, and if so where did that pre-existing matter come from and so on- thus leading us down the road of using a logical fallacy known as Infinite Regression.

2.) If the universe did come from nothing, how can that be proven?

Observe...test...then confirm.

How can you observe nothing if the universe came from nothing? If you can’t observe nothing, how then can it be tested? If it can’t be tested, what then can be confirmed?

What happens ultimately to the scientific method?


3 posted on 07/18/2013 10:42:45 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

Man goes to God and says, “We don’t need you anymore, we can create man from dirt, just like you did.”

God says, “Ok”.

Man says, “Ok here is some dirt.”

God says, “Uh uh....go and make your own dirt, first.”


4 posted on 07/18/2013 10:43:11 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

I always heard the opposite. The reason the big bang could occur was because there was no existing universe to oppose it’s creation. Whether or not you think God was involved in that depends on your own religion I guess.

Nevertheless, there is nothing in the laws of thermo that contradict the big bang. Once a universe exists, within that universe, you can’t create something from nothing.


5 posted on 07/18/2013 10:45:18 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

“.. can you observe nothing if the universe ..”

agreed


6 posted on 07/18/2013 10:45:21 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kimtom
quantum mechanics could have created the Universe

Yeah, but why would it?

7 posted on 07/18/2013 10:45:23 AM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper

And who created Quantum Mechanics?


8 posted on 07/18/2013 10:45:44 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

“...that can dig matter out of space time and leave a hole called gravity........”

Is that what gravity is??


9 posted on 07/18/2013 10:46:15 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

Yes, but it will be full of cats.


10 posted on 07/18/2013 10:47:00 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fruser1

“..Once a universe exists, within that universe, ...”

yes, but that begs the question...

:)


11 posted on 07/18/2013 10:47:15 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

For those of you who don’t have the time to read the article, the answer to the question in the headline is “No.”


12 posted on 07/18/2013 10:47:34 AM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

Regarding the whole something from nothing issue, I thought the latest ideas were that “empty” space is constantly creating and destroying matter and anti matter from “nothing”.

Am I mistaken?

Also my only take away from the article is that scientists do not know what the universe is or where it came from.

It always seemed obvious to me that just because we can only observe this universe, that does not mean it is the “universe” meaning everything. There could be countless big bang universes all around ours. Or one bigger creation by God.

They just don’t know.


13 posted on 07/18/2013 10:47:49 AM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

If god is the basis for our constitution and our
“God given rights” then all the libtards have to do
is prove there is no god. Then in their mind all rights
would default to state granted privilege. It doesn’t
matter, the constitution is a dead letter anyway.


14 posted on 07/18/2013 10:48:04 AM PDT by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist
Finite minds are incapable of understanding many infinite realities, at least on this earthly plane. As even the questions take your breath away, the answers must be mind-blowing.
15 posted on 07/18/2013 10:48:14 AM PDT by JPG (Obama Does Egypt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

..Yes, but it will be full of cats....”

That would create an imbalance.....


16 posted on 07/18/2013 10:48:35 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kimtom; All

In the end, that which is to be confirmed must first be tested, and that which is tested must first be observed, but how do you observe matter that is non-existent?


17 posted on 07/18/2013 10:49:05 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

Ok, only half of it would be full of an indeterminant number of potential cats.


18 posted on 07/18/2013 10:49:08 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

Or as that great philosopher, Billy Preston sang, “Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.”


19 posted on 07/18/2013 10:49:20 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

Of course, it all boils down to “where did God (or some other first cause) come from?”

And so far as I know, no one has been able to answer that.

I intend to ask God myself, when He calls me home, and I see hi at last.


20 posted on 07/18/2013 10:50:44 AM PDT by chesley (Vast deserts of political ignorance makes liberalism possible - James Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

It seems Ben Bernanke, Obama et al can create fiscal solvency, seemingly. So why not create something from a nothing nothingness. Already been done.


21 posted on 07/18/2013 10:51:02 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom
Christians argue for the creation of the universe ex nihilio, which is not foreclosed by the prospect that the initial singularity arouse as a result of a fluctuation in the vacuum state [in fact, it is a scientific proof of creation from nothing, by definition.]

If the laws of quantum mechanics existed: Who created the law? And why would creating laws which led to the initial singularity make God any less great than He is?

Arguing against materialism is ultimately an argument God, who uses material agencies, including law and meta law, and physics and metaphysics, to achieve His ends.

22 posted on 07/18/2013 10:51:19 AM PDT by FredZarguna (They Old School. We New School. We don't read cursive in New School. My Generation. We retahded, sir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

Multiple cosmologists (like Avi Loeb at Harvard Univerity) say that the universe had a beginning and will come to an end.


And I’ve been to the restaurants at both. ;-)


23 posted on 07/18/2013 10:51:20 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JPG; All

So they are asking that for now we take this on....faith?

Like I said before, that which is to be confirmed must first be tested, and that which is tested must first be observed.

But how do you observe matter that is non-existent?


24 posted on 07/18/2013 10:51:43 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! Rom. 11:33


25 posted on 07/18/2013 10:51:50 AM PDT by Lake Living
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

philosopher, Billy Preston sang, “Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.”....”

...or’ “you gotta’ have something........”


26 posted on 07/18/2013 10:52:05 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

It’s only been done once that I know of................


27 posted on 07/18/2013 10:52:47 AM PDT by Red Badger (Want to be surprised? Google your own name......Want to have fun? Google your friend's names........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg

The “answer” is “No,” in the author’s opinion; and he is mistaken.


28 posted on 07/18/2013 10:53:07 AM PDT by FredZarguna (They Old School. We New School. We don't read cursive in New School. My Generation. We retahded, sir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

And the cat s would be both dead and alive at the same time...............


29 posted on 07/18/2013 10:53:51 AM PDT by Red Badger (Want to be surprised? Google your own name......Want to have fun? Google your friend's names........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

“What happens ultimately to the scientific method?”

It’s as dead as the constitution, its all
scientific consensus now. No facts or proof needed,
just a bunch of ignorant jacka$$es with PhD’s who
agree. To them even honorary PhD’s count.


30 posted on 07/18/2013 10:53:57 AM PDT by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

where would you put the litter box?

(or are these feral cats?)


31 posted on 07/18/2013 10:54:03 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kimtom; betty boop; marron; Alamo-Girl; CottShop; metmom; xzins; GodGunsGuts; Fichori; tpanther; ...

Hope springs eternal. BEEP!


32 posted on 07/18/2013 10:54:19 AM PDT by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom
According to the First Law of Thermodynamics, nothing in the Universe (i.e., matter or energy) can pop into existence from nothing (see Miller, 2013).

Not true. Yes, in the long run energy is conserved but for short times one version of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, (delta E)(delta T) > h/2*pi, shows that anti-particles with non-zero mass (i.e. energy) can pop up and then recombine a short time later. This is observed repeatedly in nuclear particle accelerator experiments. The vacuum is not just emptiness but a seething sea of these particles. This leads to macro effects such as the Casimir effect, a force between two uncharged metallic plates in a vacuum placed a few micrometers apart, which has been observed experimentally.
33 posted on 07/18/2013 10:54:41 AM PDT by fifedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

LOL. Good one.

Infinite regression of matter is logically fallacious.

The Steady-State theory is toast.

The universe had a beginning. The end of it (some 100 trillion years from now according to cosmologists will subatomic particles breaking apart and then - static).


34 posted on 07/18/2013 10:54:58 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

...in an infinite number of boxes...............


35 posted on 07/18/2013 10:55:11 AM PDT by Red Badger (Want to be surprised? Google your own name......Want to have fun? Google your friend's names........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: fruser1

>>>Once a universe exists, within that universe, you can’t create something from nothing.

In other words, once we grant that One Big Miracle occurred, then we can grant a non-miraculous, fully knowable, universe comprising matter and energy.

Got it.


36 posted on 07/18/2013 10:55:53 AM PDT by GoodDay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

“In 1973, physicist Edward Tryon of the Hunter College of the City University of New York published a paper in the British science journal Nature titled, “Is the Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation?””

Well, in 1953 Philip K. Dick wrote “The Trouble With Bubbles”, which explores the problems of such Quantum Monkey-wrenching...


37 posted on 07/18/2013 10:56:08 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Mass murder and cannibalism are the twin sacraments of socialism - "Who-whom?"-Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimtom

Gravity is the absence of space.
Space is the absence of gravity..................


38 posted on 07/18/2013 10:56:55 AM PDT by Red Badger (Want to be surprised? Google your own name......Want to have fun? Google your friend's names........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist
No one is asking you to take fluctuations of the vacuum state on faith. They happen within your own body literally on the order of >1015 times every second. Their consequences are observable, and through quantum electrodynamics have been verified to higher orders of precision than virtually any scientific measure we have. They are real, material, and faith is not involved.
39 posted on 07/18/2013 10:57:07 AM PDT by FredZarguna (They Old School. We New School. We don't read cursive in New School. My Generation. We retahded, sir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist
In the end it does come down to faith. I believe that God and the universe(s) have always existed and will continue eternally. Can I “prove” that? Nope.
40 posted on 07/18/2013 10:57:48 AM PDT by JPG (Obama Does Egypt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

“..Gravity is the absence of space.
Space is the absence of gravity.....................”

wrong!!

Liberals’ heads are still intact!!!!


41 posted on 07/18/2013 10:58:10 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist
What happens ultimately to the scientific method?

When one speaks of something outside of Physics(the physical Universe) one HAS to use a different science: Metaphysics.

Yet scientists CAN postulate that there was an UN-caused Cause (God) simply because every effect...including the singularity that became the Big Bang, needs a cause; but many refuse.

42 posted on 07/18/2013 11:00:00 AM PDT by ThomasMore (Islam is the Whore of Babylon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Williams

As I understand it, matter is space that has been folded up and then put into motion. Fold space one way and electrons are formed. Fold space another way and protons are formed. The folding and unfolding of space is probably a very energetic process.


43 posted on 07/18/2013 11:02:52 AM PDT by AceMineral (One day the people will beg for chains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

ummm;?

Jastrow—who is considered by many to be one of the greatest science writers of our time—certainly is no creationist. But as a scientist who is an astrophysicist, he has written often on the inescapable conclusion that the Universe had a beginning. Consider, for example, these statements from his pen:

Now both theory and observation pointed to an expanding Universe and a beginning in time.... About thirty years ago science solved the mystery of the birth and death of stars, and acquired new evidence that the Universe had a beginning (1978, pp. 47,105).
Jastrow, Robert (1978), God and the Astronomers (New York: W.W. Norton).

But Dr. Barrow went even further when he noted:

As the implications of the quantum picture of matter were explored more fully, a further radically new consequence appears that was to impinge upon the concept of the vacuum. Werner Heisenberg showed that there were complementary pairs of attributes of things which could not be measured simultaneously with arbitrary precision, even with perfect instruments. This restriction on measurement became known as the Uncertainty Principle. One pair of complementary attributes limited by the Uncertainty Principle is the combination of position and momentum. Thus we cannot know at once where something is and how it is moving with arbitrary precision….

The Uncertainty Principle and the quantum theory revolutionised our conception of the vacuum. We can no longer sustain the simple idea that a vacuum is just an empty box. If we could say that there were no particles in a box, that it was completely empty of all mass and energy, then we would have to violate the Uncertainty Principle because we would require perfect information about motion at every point and about the energy of the system at a given instant of time….

This discovery at the heart of the quantum description of matter means that the concept of a vacuum must be somewhat realigned. It is no longer to be associated with the idea of the void and of nothingness or empty space. Rather, it is merely the emptiest possible state in the sense of the state that possesses the lowest possible energy; the state from which no further energy can be removed (2000, pp. 204,205,
Barrow, John D. (2000), The Book of Nothing: Vacuums, Voids, and the Latest Ideas about the Origins of the Universe (New York: Pantheon).


44 posted on 07/18/2013 11:04:39 AM PDT by kimtom (USA ; Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

Probably. But you have to have some “nothing” to start with, and there’s not much of that. Even the stuff we can’t see in the universe is something of a nothing. Dark Matter is everywhere. How would they know they weren’t starting with THAT?


45 posted on 07/18/2013 11:04:46 AM PDT by redhead (NO GROUND TO THE DEVIL! Remember BENGHAZI!! Use Weaponized Prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kimtom; Red Badger

The litter boxes would potentially contain litter. Of which hypothetical cats would make use. With theoretical cat poops.


46 posted on 07/18/2013 11:05:56 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: kimtom; GodGunsGuts; Fichori; tpanther; Gordon Greene; Ethan Clive Osgoode; betty boop; ...

It’s an interesting mental exercise considering the materialistic model of the universe.

Consider that your average super giant star, when it goes supernova, collapses into a black hole which has such a strong gravitational attraction that not even light can escape and the fabric of space itself is twisted.

And that’s just ONE star.

Now, here these ID deniers come along and tell us with a straight face, that billions of years ago, the entire mass of the entire known universe was contained in something called singularity. That’s a LOT of stars. And then some.

So space and time did not yet exist, but this blob (for lack of a better term) was sitting there, when there was no were to sit, for an indeterminate amount of time, even though time did not yet exist and nobody knows where that was or how long it took.

Then, for some reason, this singularity in one trillion-trilliointh of a second suddenly expanded to fill almost the entire expanse of the now known universe, even though nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, and the gravitational attraction of that much matter should have precluded ANYTHING from escaping in the least.

And then creationists and IDers are ridiculed for believing stuff on faith with no hard scientific evidence.

And that doesn’t even account for all the order and information present in creation that we see now. That just deals with the beginning.

Kind of hypocritical, is it not?


47 posted on 07/18/2013 11:06:08 AM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

The key to the rebuttal is the entropy level now and what it must have been at the moment before the big bang or at the moment of the big bang.


48 posted on 07/18/2013 11:08:02 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

“But how do you observe matter that is non-existent?”

In a particle collider.


49 posted on 07/18/2013 11:08:27 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Williams
Regarding the whole something from nothing issue, I thought the latest ideas were that “empty” space is constantly creating and destroying matter and anti matter from “nothing”.

This is correct and his been well verified since the 1950's.

Also my only take away from the article is that scientists do not know what the universe is or where it came from.

This is not a scientific article, it is a religious article pretending to be science. That said, time -- as far as we know -- begins with the instant of the singularity. Speculation "before" that, if there is a "before" that -- is not in the realm of science. Science does not know what happens on the order of a trillionth of a second or so before the singularity, and the REALLY interesting physics happens around 10^-45 second or less.

It always seemed obvious to me that just because we can only observe this universe, that does not mean it is the “universe” meaning everything.

This is an abuse of terminology, which unfortunately some cosmologists/physicists participate in. By definition, the word "universe" means "everything that is." In correct English, if there are other realities they are still part of the "universe." If you're religious, universe is a synonym for "all of creation."

Within the region (it may be the only region there is, or not) governed by the same physical laws that we are, there are things beyond our horizon. That is, loosely, there are things within our universe we cannot see. They are moving away from us and because the speed of light is finite they are now so far away and moving so quickly that the light from them can never reach us; this is a scientifically established fact based on the expansion speed and the known start time and dimensions. So, loosely, in your language, there are already parts of our "universe" that we know are not "part" of the universe that we can know or that can even affect us...

50 posted on 07/18/2013 11:08:38 AM PDT by FredZarguna (They Old School. We New School. We don't read cursive in New School. My Generation. We retahded, sir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson