Teleology And Human Ethics...

[Tassman]

Tass, that was not the point, when speaking of an eternal past not being possible you accused me of misquoting Vilenkin - that He was speaking of this universe not the multiverse - you were wrong and falsely accused me. How about an apology?

Firstly, unlike Holy Writ, what Vilenken says is not necessarily unchangeable and eternally true. It’s a hypothesis, which by definition means it's a provisional conjecture and subject to possible change.

Secondly, he clearly sees possible ways to overcome the “boundary problem” and has presented a possible solution as linked to previously...as have several other cosmologists.

Thirdly, you are misquoting Vilenkin by misrepresenting what he is saying. You have done this many times previously as has been frequently pointed out.

And I did not quote mine Vilenkin, he was clear in my Youtube link and in your own link to his paper - he is speaking of "literally nothing" the only pre existing conditions necessary are the laws pf physics - in the "Platonic sense" - his words not mine.

Vilenkin's model is simply an Inflationary model which uses tunnelling to explain the beginning of inflation, and the origin of the inflation field. He seems to use the term “nothing” to gain more attention to his paper, whereas a state of ‘nothing’ (as we laymen understand the word) is non-existent. He acknowledges this in his “tunnelling” hypothesis.

And you reject these because of your atheistic agenda - you need eternal matter and energy or your faith falls apart!

So dishonest! This from someone misusing scientific hypotheses to “prove” his religious presupposition of creation ex nihilo!

And how does Vilenkin get past the problem - creation from "literally nothing" as your own link states!

He gets past the problem by proposing “tunnelling” from the “nothingness” of the Quantum Vacuum.

[seer]

I understand that neither Vilenkin nor Guth suggested creation from 'absolute nothing' equivalent to the 'ex nihilo' you believe. They proposed the formation of universes from the 'cosmological nothing' as in the you tube you cited.

Actually you are wrong, that is exactly what Vilenkin is suggesting - creation from "literally nothing." His words not mine. And it is not that as A Christian that I need an ex nihilo event for this universe, since the Bible is silent on the issue, but your religion does need matter and energy to be past eternal - period. So you have the real agenda here.

If you read there works completely, including Krauss, you will realize the describe this 'cosmological nothing' as something.

You are correct about Krauss, his "nothing" is a sea of virtual particles, you are wrong about Vilenkin.

[shunyadragon]

You are correct about Krauss, his "nothing" is a sea of virtual particles, you are wrong about Vilenkin.

Your selective citing of Vilenkin is egregiously dishonest, and solely based on a selfish egocentric religious agenda.

Source: https://debunkingwlc.wordpress.com/2010/08/11/alexander-vilenkins-model-of-cosmic-origins/

"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness. The tunneling is described by the laws of quantum mechanics, and thus “nothing” should be subject to these laws. The laws of physics must have existed, even though there was no universe."

– Alexander Vilenkin in his book Many Worlds in One (2006), Page 181

© Copyright Original Source

A more specific highly technical description of this is available here:

Source: https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.30.509

Quantum creation of universes by Alexander Vilenkin

ABSTRACT
A cosmological wave function describing the tunneling of the Universe from "nothing" into a de Sitter space is found in a simple minisuperspace model. The tunneling probability is proportional to
exp (−38G2ρv), where ρv is the vacuum energy density at an extremum of the effective potential V(φ). The tunneling is most probable to the highest maximum of V(φ).

© Copyright Original Source

To make simple Vilenkin proposes that the Laws of Nature exist with the potential of the formation of universes from this Quantum nothing through the concept of tunneling. The some of the energy equals zero, but this does not translate to no energy exists. Vilenkin and Krauss describe this as potential energy as described above, and also described as Quantum gravity in Quantum gravity models as a factor in the formation of the singularity and then the universe as described at ~2:04 in you tube you cited.



Krauss and Vilenkin essentially believe in the same thing, but word it differently. The Quantum Nothingness is indeed something.

[seer]

Firstly, unlike Holy Writ, what Vilenken says is not necessarily unchangeable and eternally true. It’s a hypothesis, which by definition means it's a provisional conjecture and subject to possible change.

Secondly, he clearly sees possible ways to overcome the “boundary problem” and has presented a possible solution as linked to previously...as have several other cosmologists.

Thirdly, you are misquoting Vilenkin by misrepresenting what he is saying. You have done this many times previously as has been frequently pointed out.

Tass, you already lied about me concerning Vilenkin universe/multiverse thing and now you are doing it again - where did I misrepresent what Vilenkin said - link my post or quote my words or admit that you are playing me false again.

Vilenkin's model is simply an Inflationary model which uses tunnelling to explain the beginning of inflation, and the origin of the inflation field. He seems to use the term “nothing” to gain more attention to his paper, whereas a state of ‘nothing’ (as we laymen understand the word) is non-existent. He acknowledges this in his “tunnelling” hypothesis.

That is a lie, he makes clear that the tunneling only happens after the creation event, the ONLY pre existing condition necessary are the laws of physics in the Platonic sense. A creation event from where there is no matter, space or time. Where does your tunneling take place Tass if there is no space or time? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHdI4Let27I

And the the quantum vacuum is necessary for the tunneling, yet the vacuum must first be created: start at 4:57 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSESZR3wC8s

Stop lying Tass, it is getting boring...

[seer]

Your selective citing of Vilenkin is egregiously dishonest, and solely based on a selfish egocentric religious agenda.

Source: https://debunkingwlc.wordpress.com/2010/08/11/alexander-vilenkins-model-of-cosmic-origins/

"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness. The tunneling is described by the laws of quantum mechanics, and thus “nothing” should be subject to these laws. The laws of physics must have existed, even though there was no universe."

– Alexander Vilenkin in his book Many Worlds in One (2006), Page 181

© Copyright Original Source

Wrong Shuny, Krauss and Vilenkin don't agree - Krauss' nothing is a sea a virtual particles, Vilenkin's nothing only includes the the laws of physics in the "Platonic sense." Again, instead of using a web page with out of context quotes listen to the man himself, start at 4:57 as I told Tass: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSESZR3wC8s

[shunyadragon]

Wrong Shuny, Krauss and Vilenkin don't agree - Krauss' nothing is a sea a virtual particles, Vilenkin's nothing only includes the the laws of physics in the "Platonic sense." Again, instead of using a web page with out of context quotes listen to the man himself, start at 4:57 as I told Tass: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSESZR3wC8s

Your selective citing of Vilenkin is egregiously dishonest, and solely based on a selfish egocentric religious agenda.

Source: https://debunkingwlc.wordpress.com/2...osmic-origins/

"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness. The tunneling is described by the laws of quantum mechanics, and thus “nothing” should be subject to these laws. The laws of physics must have existed, even though there was no universe."

– Alexander Vilenkin in his book Many Worlds in One (2006), Page 181

© Copyright Original Source

A more specific highly technical description of this is available here:

Source: https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstrac...hysRevD.30.509

Quantum creation of universes by Alexander Vilenkin

ABSTRACT
A cosmological wave function describing the tunneling of the Universe from "nothing" into a de Sitter space is found in a simple minisuperspace model. The tunneling probability is proportional to
exp (−38G2ρv), where ρv is the vacuum energy density at an extremum of the effective potential V(φ). The tunneling is most probable to the highest maximum of V(φ).

© Copyright Original Source

To make simple Vilenkin proposes that the Laws of Nature exist with the potential of the formation of universes from this Quantum nothing through the concept of tunneling. The some of the energy equals zero, but this does not translate to no energy exists. Vilenkin and Krauss describe this as potential energy as described above, and also described as Quantum gravity in Quantum gravity models as a factor in the formation of the singularity and then the universe as described at ~2:04 in you tube you cited.



Krauss and Vilenkin essentially believe in the same thing, but word it differently. The Quantum Nothingness is indeed something.

You failed to respond to the specific references as cite.

"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness."

- Alexander Vilenkin

[seer]

Your selective citing of Vilenkin is egregiously dishonest, and solely based on a selfish egocentric religious agenda.

Source: https://debunkingwlc.wordpress.com/2...osmic-origins/

"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness. The tunneling is described by the laws of quantum mechanics, and thus “nothing” should be subject to these laws. The laws of physics must have existed, even though there was no universe."

– Alexander Vilenkin in his book Many Worlds in One (2006), Page 181

© Copyright Original Source

A more specific highly technical description of this is available here:

Source: https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstrac...hysRevD.30.509

Quantum creation of universes by Alexander Vilenkin

ABSTRACT
A cosmological wave function describing the tunneling of the Universe from "nothing" into a de Sitter space is found in a simple minisuperspace model. The tunneling probability is proportional to
exp (−38G2ρv), where ρv is the vacuum energy density at an extremum of the effective potential V(φ). The tunneling is most probable to the highest maximum of V(φ).

© Copyright Original Source

To make simple Vilenkin proposes that the Laws of Nature exist with the potential of the formation of universes from this Quantum nothing through the concept of tunneling. The some of the energy equals zero, but this does not translate to no energy exists. Vilenkin and Krauss describe this as potential energy as described above, and also described as Quantum gravity in Quantum gravity models as a factor in the formation of the singularity and then the universe as described at ~2:04 in you tube you cited.



Krauss and Vilenkin essentially believe in the same thing, but word it differently. The Quantum Nothingness is indeed something.

You failed to respond to the specific references as cite.

"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness."

- Alexander Vilenkin

Shuny you are lying again, why don't you go to my link and listen to Vilenkin? His nothing does not include particles, quantum particles, nothing but the pre-existing laws of physics. He makes that perfectly clear as the interviewer asks about these specific things. There is no SPACE and NO TIME. No PARTICLES no QUANTUM VACUUM, no ENGERY. For those who do not have a religious agenda like Shuny start at 4:57: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSESZR3wC8s

[shunyadragon]

Actually you are wrong, that is exactly what Vilenkin is suggesting - creation from "literally nothing." His words not mine. And it is not that as A Christian that I need an ex nihilo event for this universe, since the Bible is silent on the issue, but your religion does need matter and energy to be past eternal - period. So you have the real agenda here.

I missed this as a misrepresentation of both your view and mine. There is no 'need' in my view concerning the science of whether science can falsify the eternal nature of the Universe. I have repeated many times that science most likely can never falsify whether our physical existence is eternal or not. There is no 'need' here to justify my belief one way nor another, because science is not help here. Your lying concerning your belief in the Creation form 'exnhilo.' For many years now you have dishonestly selectively cited Vilenkin, only one scientist among many, to justify your agenda of Creation 'exnhilo.'

Vilenkin only proposed on of many hypothesis among contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and never proposed that alternate hypothesis were impossible.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny you are lying again, why don't you go to my link and listen to Vilenkin? His nothing does not include particles, quantum particles, nothing but the pre-existing laws of physics. He makes that perfectly clear as the interviewer asks about these specific things. There is no SPACE and NO TIME. No PARTICLES no QUANTUM VACUUM, no ENGERY. For those who do not have a religious agenda like Shuny start at 4:57: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSESZR3wC8s

You are a dishonest hypocrite.

You failed to respond to the specific references as cite including the fact that 'Quantum nothing is a state of potential energy that can form universes as cited, and not absolute nothing. Listen again beginning at ~2:04.


"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness."

- Alexander Vilenkin

[seer]

You are a dishonest hypocrite.

You failed to respond to the specific references as cite including the fact that 'Quantum nothing is a state of potential energy that can form universes as cited, and not absolute nothing. Listen again beginning at ~2:04.


"The state of “nothing” cannot be identified with absolute nothingness."

- Alexander Vilenkin

I have listened to it a dozen times Shuny - I have two simple questions for you. Krauss claims that the universe rose from a pre-existing sea of virtual particles, what pre-existing things or stuff does Vilenkin say his theory starts with? Second, Vilenkin said the universe rose in conditions where there was no time or space - how can anything pre-exist (physical, or even the quantum world) where there is no space or time?

[JimL]

Shuny you are lying again, why don't you go to my link and listen to Vilenkin? His nothing does not include particles, quantum particles, nothing but the pre-existing laws of physics. He makes that perfectly clear as the interviewer asks about these specific things. There is no SPACE and NO TIME. No PARTICLES no QUANTUM VACUUM, no ENGERY. For those who do not have a religious agenda like Shuny start at 4:57: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSESZR3wC8s

Seer, he posted a link quoting from Vilinkens own books. Obviously nothing can't tunnel through nothing. The problem is in the physicists loose description, at times, of the quantum vacuum as nothing. Even Krauss, as you know, calls the quantum vacuum nothing even though he knows it isn't absolutely nothing. They know what they're talking about, they know what they mean by nothing, but unfortunately the lay person is easily confused by their terminology.

[seer]

Seer, he posted a link quoting from Vilinkens own books. Obviously nothing can't tunnel through nothing. The problem is in the physicists loose description, at times, of the quantum vacuum as nothing. Even Krauss, as you know, calls the quantum vacuum nothing even though he knows it isn't absolutely nothing. They know what they're talking about, they know what they mean by nothing, but unfortunately the lay person is easily confused by their terminology.

No Jim, Vilenkin makes it clear that his universe comes from conditions where there is no space or time or matter. How can you have pre-existing energy without space or time? Where does that exist then? The only thing that his "nothing" actually includes are the pre-existing laws of physics. He makes that perfectly clear in my link - again go to 4:57 in my link, that specific question is asked and answered. Watch it for yourself again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSESZR3wC8s

[shunyadragon]

I have listened to it a dozen times Shuny - I have two simple questions for you. Krauss claims that the universe rose from a pre-existing sea of virtual particles, what pre-existing things or stuff does Vilenkin say his theory starts with? Second, Vilenkin said the universe rose in conditions where there was no time or space - how can anything pre-exist (physical, or even the quantum world) where there is no space or time?

Krauss' description of the 'Quantum nothing' is there is 'no space nor time.'

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/science/space/cosmologists-try-to-explain-a-universe-springing-from-nothing.html

Dr. Krauss delineates three different kinds of nothingness. First is what may have passed muster as nothing with the ancient Greeks: empty space. But we now know that even empty space is filled with energy, vibrating with electromagnetic fields and so-called virtual particles dancing in and out of existence on borrowed energy courtesy of the randomness that characterizes reality on the smallest scales, according to the rules of quantum theory.

Second is nothing, without even space and time. Following a similar quantum logic, theorists have proposed that whole universes, little bubbles of space-time, could pop into existence, like bubbles in boiling water, out of this nothing.

© Copyright Original Source

Krauss and Vilenkin agree.

[seer]

Krauss' description of the 'Quantum nothing' is there is 'no space nor time.'

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/science/space/cosmologists-try-to-explain-a-universe-springing-from-nothing.html

Dr. Krauss delineates three different kinds of nothingness. First is what may have passed muster as nothing with the ancient Greeks: empty space. But we now know that even empty space is filled with energy, vibrating with electromagnetic fields and so-called virtual particles dancing in and out of existence on borrowed energy courtesy of the randomness that characterizes reality on the smallest scales, according to the rules of quantum theory.

Second is nothing, without even space and time. Following a similar quantum logic, theorists have proposed that whole universes, little bubbles of space-time, could pop into existence, like bubbles in boiling water, out of this nothing.

© Copyright Original Source

Krauss and Vilenkin agree.

Shuny, which nothing is it, the one with space and virtual particles or the nothing without space? And if it is the latter what is popping into existence - since even virtual particles need space to exist. So no space no anything, anything physical at least. BTW - the first nothing is Krauss' position the second is Vilenkin's - and they are not the same.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny, which nothing is it, the one with space and virtual particles or the nothing without space? And if it is the latter what is popping into existence - since even virtual particles need space to exist. So no space no anything, anything physical at least. BTW - the first nothing is Krauss' position the second is Vilenkin's - and they are not the same.

Both as described by Krauss and Vilenkin. The bottom line is Krauss supports the no space and no time as the nature of Quantum Nothing as Vilenkin does. They both are in agreement as cited.