What do those Nobel people know anyway?

[seer]

I don't think you should accuse Shuny of lying. It's far more likely he misunderstood what's being argued.

No he is being dishonest, we have been over this a number of times: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...-Ethics/page39

[seer]

The video presented by Lurch confirms this.

Shuny Lurch's link is speaking of empty space - not no space, if you think otherwise where exactly does it say that. I will be waiting...

[shunyadragon]

Shuny Lurch's link is speaking of empty space - not no space, if you think otherwise where exactly does it say that. I will be waiting...

You do not need to wait,just listen to the whole video. You were accurate when you first responded to Lurches video;

So basically nothing is something...

Lurch's link describes the Quantum nothing as something, and yes the no space and no time is the nature of the nothing as something which Vilenkin, Krauss, Guth and Hawking agree. It describes the Quantum Vacuum in detail, and yes the Quantum vacuum is a product of natural law, but natural law is platonic in nature and independent of time and space, non-physical and non-mental and Quantum vacuum exists as long as Natural Law exists with no known beginning.

[seer]

You do not need to wait,just listen to the whole video. You were accurate when you first responded to Lurches video;

Lurch's link describes the Quantum nothing as something, and yes the no space and no time is the nature of the nothing as something which Vilenkin, Krauss, Guth and Hawking agree. It describes the Quantum Vacuum in detail, and yes the Quantum vacuum is a product of natural law, but natural law is platonic in nature and independent of time and space, non-physical and non-mental and Quantum vacuum exists as long as Natural Law exists with no known beginning.

Shuny, I have listened to it twice. They are not speaking of quantum nothing that exists absent of space, as Vilenkin did, they are speaking of empty space, which is not really empty. I'm still waiting for you to tell me when they say that this quantum world exist apart from space.

[Jedidiah]

Shuny, I have listened to it twice. They are not speaking of quantum nothing that exists absent of space, as Vilenkin did, they are speaking of empty space, which is not really empty. I'm still waiting for you to tell me when they say that this quantum world exist apart from space.

Perhaps a quote from where the video makes the claim that you are attributing to it, shunya.

[seer]

Perhaps a quote from where the video makes the claim that you are attributing to it, shunya.

They are speaking of empty space, not no space. Start at about 18:30 with John Barrow's talk. Then there is the logic of it all - where could this quantum world possibly exist in the absence of space? As far as we know, the quantum would only exists in space.

[Jedidiah]

They are speaking of empty space, not no space. Start at about 18:30 with John Barrow's talk. Then there is the logic of it all - where could this quantum world possibly exist in the absence of space? As far as we know, the quantum would only exists in space.

I am just putting the whole matter in shunya's court. It is his place to support his claim.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny Lurch's link is speaking of empty space - not no space, if you think otherwise where exactly does it say that. I will be waiting...

From a source previously cited concerning the view of Krauss as the same as Vilenkin, which is a Quantum nothing with no space and no 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

[shunyadragon]

Shuny Lurch's link is speaking of empty space - not no space, if you think otherwise where exactly does it say that. I will be waiting...

First, John (in the wheel chair) summarizes the three concepts of nothing at about 28:45 that the initial speaker presented. Yes the concept of Quantum no space and no time is addressed in the video.

The speaker immediately after this, George Ellis, discusses this Quantum nothing with no space nor time 'before the beginning' of the universe.

More to follow . . .

[seer]

First, John (in the wheel chair) summarizes the three concepts of nothing at about 28:45 that the initial speaker presented. Yes the concept of Quantum no space and no time is addressed in the video.

The speaker immediately after this, George Ellis, discusses this Quantum nothing with no space nor time 'before the beginning' of the universe.

More to follow . . .

No, the quantum vacuum or quantum world was only what we find in space. Barrow makes that clear in the opening talk. Ellis is speaking of creation with ONLY the laws of physics being prior to the event (similar to Vilenkin). No preexisting energy, only a prior structure provide by the laws of physics see (30:30 on).

Interesting discussion with Ellis:

Horgan: Lawrence Krauss, in A Universe from Nothing, claims that physics has basically solved the mystery of why there is something rather than nothing. Do you agree?

Ellis: Certainly not. He is presenting untested speculative theories of how things came into existence out of a pre-existing complex of entities, including variational principles, quantum field theory, specific symmetry groups, a bubbling vacuum, all the components of the standard model of particle physics, and so on. .

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...ion-free-will/

[shunyadragon]

No, the quantum vacuum or quantum world was only what we find in space. Barrow makes that clear in the opening talk. Ellis is speaking of creation with ONLY the laws of physics being prior to the event (similar to Vilenkin). No preexisting energy, only a prior structure provide by the laws of physics see (30:30 on).

Interesting discussion with Ellis:

Your ignoring my specific statement by George Ellis who wrote the book 'Before the Beginning.'

The Quantum nothing before the beginning with no space, and no time is described by George Ellis.

[seer]

Your ignoring my specific statement by George Ellis who wrote the book 'Before the Beginning.'

The Quantum nothing before the beginning with no space, and no time is described by George Ellis.

Right Shuny, that is why I said: Ellis is speaking of creation with ONLY the laws of physics being prior to the event (similar to Vilenkin). No preexisting energy, only a prior structure provide by the laws of physics see (30:30 on).

But every thing else is about empty space as Barrows sets out in the opening talk, that is what they are discussing the quantum would in our universe. Black holes and such. They are not speaking of what actually existed prior to this universe, if anything, and Ellis only briefly mentions it. And his view is the same as Vilenkin's - no preexisting space - only the laws of physics. So they are not speaking of a preexisting quantum world giving rise to our universe, which is what you suggested.

[shunyadragon]

Right Shuny, that is why I said: Ellis is speaking of creation with ONLY the laws of physics being prior to the event (similar to Vilenkin). No preexisting energy, only a prior structure provide by the laws of physics see (30:30 on).

George Ellis specifically described the Quantum nothing 'before the beginning' as a no space and no time nothing from which universe spontaneously arise.

But every thing else is about empty space as Barrows sets out in the opening talk, that is what they are discussing the quantum would in our universe. Black holes and such. They are not speaking of what actually existed prior to this universe, if anything, and Ellis only briefly mentions it. And his view is the same as Vilenkin's - no preexisting space - only the laws of physics. So they are not speaking of a preexisting quantum world giving rise to our universe, which is what you suggested.

You are misrepresenting the Barrows and the the rest o the video. Barrows discusses many aspects the concepts of Quantum nothing, and not just empty space. Ellis describes the Quantum nothing and briefly mentions is not the issue. You said, it was not part of the video, which is false.

[seer]

George Ellis specifically described the Quantum nothing 'before the beginning' as a no space and no time nothing from which universe spontaneously arise.

That is a lie Shuny, he never uses the term quantum nothing. And he is clear. the only thing that needs to exist "before" creation of the universe are the laws of physics. If you think otherwise where exactly does he use the term quantum nothing?

You are misrepresenting the Barrows and the the rest o the video. Barrows discusses many aspects the concepts of Quantum nothing, and not just empty space. Ellis describes the Quantum nothing and briefly mentions is not the issue. You said, it was not part of the video, which is false.

Why do you keep lying about me Shuny? This video is about empty space not what came beforethe creation or even how that universe came into being. Except for Ellis quickly mentioning it.

[seer]

Your ignoring my specific statement by George Ellis who wrote the book 'Before the Beginning.'

The Quantum nothing before the beginning with no space, and no time is described by George Ellis.

BTW Shuny, you do know that Ellis is a Christian and favors a theistic explanation for the creation of the universe - correct?

Start at 11:00 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L-g4CiJIVM