

'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009 [video] - drx
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo

======
d0mine
_It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics.

You are all stardust.

You couldn't be here if stars hadn't exploded. Because the elements, the
carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution
weren't created at the beginning of time. They were created in the nuclear
furnaces of stars. And the only way they could get into your body is if the
stars were kind enough to explode.

So forget Jesus. The stars died so you could be here today._ </quote>

~~~
aufreak3
Beautiful quote from the talk. Nevertheless, this still shows attachment to
the "matter" that he himself says seems irrelevant to the universe as we've
now come to understand it. About 30% in dark matter, about 70% in Nothing.
Matter is just "all the rest < 1%". So are we matter or not?

------
spicymeatball
I found this lecture to be very interesting, but I was disappointed in all the
jabs against religion (even though I'm an atheist myself). The information he
presented about how a flat universe could come from nothing is thought-
provoking. I would love to read further discussion about the content-- for
instance, the implications of an ever-expanding universe and future societies
clueless to the presence of other galaxies. Instead, people are focusing on it
as a video about atheism, which really occupies less than 1% of the video
here.

I'm aware this lecture took place at an atheism convention, but I don't find
anti-theism to be very constructive anyway. You can be a skeptic and an
atheist without making disdainful remarks about the belief system of others.
Engaging in open, respectful conversation is a better way of making people
abandon religion anyway, if that's your goal. You know what they say about
flies, honey, and vinegar.

Regardless, there are religious scientists and cosmologists. Being patronizing
about their beliefs discourages them from contributing. As others have said,
science is not the alternative to religion, and we shouldn't treat it in such
a way.

------
crazydiamond
Very interesting. However, other "religions" such as Buddhism and Hinduism
have spoken experientially of Nothing, and the universe arising out of
Nothing. This has been misunderstood/misinterpreted as "nihilism" by the west.

Refer "Ashtavakra Gita" and ancient text, for example.

~~~
pavs
This reminds me of Infinite monkey theorem.

There are so many religion disciplines with so many diverse views on so many
things that someone from somewhere will point to an obscure reference to a
religion and argue _"See this religion also talked about this 1000s of years
ago and science just discovered it now"_. And lets forget overwhelming
majority of the religious reference that science obliterates.

So, lets say tomorrow, we discover with definite evidence that the universe
did actually came out of something, instead of nothing (which we don't know
yet for sure as krauss pointed out), most religious people will forget about
this reference made in Buddhism and Hinduism to proclaim _"Science validates
us"_ , but instead will argue _"Science doesn't know everything"_.

Please note that this is not what I am saying your personal position is, just
making a general observation of religion sometimes looking for validation from
science, only when it fits their world-view.

~~~
chrischen
Buddhism isn't really a religion like Christianity is. There are no faith-
based assumptions in Buddhism and it makes no claim to anything you can't
reason yourself independently (as far as I know). I think you should read up
on it a bit before lumping it with traditional religions. I don't think your
infinite monkey theorem applies to Buddhism because it doesn't have prophecies
(afaik) or literal descriptions of how the universe was created. In fact,
based on what I reAd I don't think buddhists even worship a god. A Buddha
seems to be just a description of a state of spiritual enlightenment.

And a trait with most religions is that adherence needs to be exclusive from
other religions. From what I learned from the simpsons, buddhists are allowed
to practice other religions. That's another sign Buddhism isn't just another
branch of Christianity.

~~~
pavs
> Buddhism isn't really a religion like Christianity is.

...

> I think you should read up on it a bit before lumping it with traditional
> religions.

I didn't really say that or implied that or say anything that's specific to
buddhism or any religion.

------
kranner
Bah, I read 'AAI' as 'AAAI' in my morning pre-coffee blurriness and was in
eager anticipation of an AI talk on simulations and world-building, or
something. Would have made more sense on HN.

------
aufreak3
I have something of an awe for atheists. They seem to have a clearer idea of
"God" than the rest because they clearly don't believe it .. or He or She or I
dunno .. but they seem to.

I liked the ending note on humility where he presented a scenario where he
thinks falsifiable science could end up not figuring out the truth about the
universe because the inhabitants won't be able to access a galaxy other than
their own.

------
porter
Forgive my naivete, I am watching the video now but won't be able to finish it
tonight. Could someone please explain to me how the universe came from
nothing? Isn't that like saying that something both is and isn't at the same
time and in the same sense?

