The universe can't come from nothing

From EvoWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Claim

The first law of thermodynamics says matter/energy cannot come from nothing. Therefore, the universe itself could not have formed naturally.

Source

Responses

  1. This is a Straw Man Argument insofar as it may be questioning the validity of the Big Bang. Big Bang Theory makes no claims about the ultimate nature of the origin of the universe. It only explains the changes in the universe that post-date an apparent singularity. Prior to that point, all scenarios are essentially speculative.
  2. For the actual origin of the universe, speculations and hypotheses of a time before (if the term before is even meaningful in this context) the Big Bang have been formulated that incorporate the principles of conservation. Conservation of energy doesn't always hold in the way laypeople understand them. In quantum systems energy obeys the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Energy dE can come out of existence for a period of time dt, where dE*dt >=h (the uncertainty principle). This is called a quantum fluctuation of the vacuum. This phenomenon has been experimentally confirmed and is responsible for the black hole radiation. It is speculated that the net energy dE of the entire universe is very close to zero, and by applying the uncertainty principle, you come up with a very large dt (the existence time of the universe). In other words, the universe might be a quantum fluctuation and essentially came from nothing.
  3. Also, according to Noether's Theorem, conservation of energy is linked to and defined by the homogeneity of time. Since the Big Bang is a singularity where time is not necessarily homogeneous, energy is not necessarily conserved.
  4. "Something can't come from nothing" doesn't have an empirical basis, since we don't have any experience with literally nothing (meaning, not even time and space), and therefore don't know how it behaves. Our current physics describes what we observe within the universe: no one knows if it can be meaningfully applied to the universe itself. In fact, everything we know comes from observations and studies conducted within the known universe. Applying that knowledge to things outside of that context (for instance, applying them to the universe itself) is logically illegitimate.
  5. The overall energy content of the universe could well be zero, since the gravitational field of heavy bodies constitutes a negative energy contribution. (It is necessary to expend energy to, e.g. convert the earth into a homogeneous cloud of dust.) In this sense, the energy content of the universe is the same as the energy content of nothing. But with all the unknowns governing modern cosmology (dark matter, dark energy) and quantum physics (energy of vacuum fluctuations), nobody knows for certain.
  6. If this argument applied, it would apply to creationism to the same degree because creationism states "God created the world from nothing".
  7. Whether or not the universe came from nothing has no bearing whatsoever on the idea of descent with modification of organisms. Creationists have failed time and time again in their attempts to use this claim to disprove observed lineages of living and fossil organisms such as brontotheres, dogs, pigs, horses, orchids, corn, wheat, ferns and snails.
  8. add more responses

Fallacies contained in this claim

Further Reading

  • Hawking, Stephen, 2001. The Universe in a Nutshell. New York: Bantam.

Related claims

Acknowledgments

Retrieved from "http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/The_universe_can%27t_come_from_nothing"
Personal tools