Each time I come back to this video it amazes me how much I've picked up between views. What a great teaching tool RUclips has become. From Darwin to Dawkins, Sagan to Hawking, Russell to Hitchens. If I had this in grade school, the science(s) would have been my chosen career path. As for now, it's an awesome past time/hobby.
@@danieljoseph6404 i mean to make up your mind and declare it fact with little to no study because some guys says it and you do not fact check shows how easily conned and impressed people are.
I watched this video in 2011 for the first time. Since then I've watched it at least two times a year. I never get tired of it. It was also the gateway to find hundreds of other lectures on this and other scientific topics, including the lectures of Richard Dawkins, of course. I've also watched lots of debates between religion and science, with participants like Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins et.al. not to forget the brilliant Christopher Hitchens, of course! May he rest in peace; even though I believe his former, still active, opponents rest in an even greater peace. I've even had the patience to listen to the debates vs the tedious theist, William Lane Craig, with his monotone, slightly annoying voice. Without his fallacious arguments, and often pure lies, he wouldn't have anything to say. So in a way I forgive the theists for that. Without those arguments, even though empty, there wouldn't be any of those debates, where you could watch and hear them embarrass themselves ... /Kjell Adrian from Sweden
I feel like my mind is having a nuclear explosion inside another nuclear explosion! this is way better than any sci-fi movie or book I could've ever read or watched. Thank you so much for posting this eloquent lecture! I'm in love!
This IS science fiction, dingbat. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
@@2fast2block stop trying to spew the same nonsense hey bud. What a complete idiot you are, you don't even see how badly your misrepresenting the laws of thermodynamics
You wouldn't believe today. Today's Britain is the ouzing of decades. DJT is considered as a saviour... You Brits have failed as a people, and as a person as a potentially sane person. You get special interrogation routes... Fuck you and your love for child abuse!
No, you're beyond stu--pid to call this brilliant. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
@@2fast2block Did you even watch the video? Krauss does a pretty good job explaining how the universe can form without breaking any laws in physics. Virtual particles, as Krauss already explained, can be observed to form without consuming any pre existing energy or matter. And in a flat universe no positive energy is required. On a quantum scale the universe behaves very differently from the universe on a human scale. The universe began as a point of infinite density. In such an environment our common sense understanding physics breaks down. If your not curious at all and just want to presuppose God why are you even watching this.
@@neosodon9895 why you want to act as if you're smart is beyond me. Look at your stupidity... "Krauss does a pretty good job explaining how the universe can form without breaking any laws in physics. Virtual particles, as Krauss already explained, can be observed to form without consuming any pre existing energy or matter. And in a flat universe no positive energy is required." You complete loser, he started with space, matter, and time already being there then just calls it "nothing." You are an embarrassment. Oh, but go ahead and tell me how that's nothing. He can't so he admits it's something after all. You are like him, you lie to yourself so you can accept the dung. That's why you're full of it, you loser.
@@2fast2block I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first reply. I could explain it in more detail but based on your reply it is apparent that would be a waste of time. You're not at all interested in the science. You're only trolling for a fight and venting your hatred of anything that confronts your religious dogma. Thanks for showing everyone what your faith is all about. It's people like you that are fueling the rapid decline of religion in the developed world.
@@neosodon9895 Look at you run because you're stuck showing what a loser you are... "I could explain it in more detail but...." You're a liar that can't face what I said, he started with space, matter, and time already being there then just calls it "nothing." You are an embarrassment. That is SO clear only some stu---pid person can miss it. All you jokes do is provide humor.
The religion in my country indoctrinated me without my permission, and now that I’m free from that nonsense come here and my brain is absolutely in love with this wonderful lecture, THIS SHOULD BE SHOWN TO SCHOOLS
Not only this should be shown in schools. If you are from USA where the Christian religion abounds and where creationists populate the country…… schools should officially teach evolution
Humility: ' We don't understand everything ', thus, ' We'll continue discovering more and more of the Universe.' Which makes it exciting as the Mystery of the Universe will keep us going. I think...Thank you Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss.
That wasn't "brilliant," it was empty. First we need a universe that included stars. Oh, not to mention then we needed life starting too on its own. Krauss and you are a joke. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God. So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally.
wow what a wonderful lecture. i always liked Dr. Krauss but he seems so abrasive when on a panel with other scientists. i know he's generally trying to lighten the mood but it always rubbed me the wrong way. when he speaks on his own he's just astonishing to listen to.
+BadKidAdvil This is usually what happens between people that have big ideas and stong arguments to support them, I used to have the same feeling about him, though the mini-fights that he had with Tyson are so amusing. He is a great aducator when you let him finish his sentences :P
That tends to happen with really smart and intelligent people. I tried reading Krauss' PhD paper and let's just say I could barely keep up with the prose portion, let alone the mathematics. The guy knows what he's talking about folks like him and should be taken seriously and given much more credence that people in funny hats that purport to know everything about everything. Piffle!
Michael Craig McGee I watched that debate! Krauss was a verbal thug, overly emotional, hurling insults at every turn, but undeniably correct in his arguments. Craig was poised and scholarly, never rising to Krauss's barbs, but ultimately came off as a skilled sophist. I can see why Dawkins won't debate him. There isn't much there, just better-worded, better-articulated versions of the same stuff we usually hear. A fifth-degree black belt in logical fallacies always loses to a bar brawler who's right.
abdul it's autism associated with intelligence. people with high is have ridiculous egos. not their fault, as they are smarter than 99%. ironic because you can see a person's iq based on the principle. the smartest people are those like Musk who are so higher than Hawkings, that they don't have an ego. because they feel alone
@Michael Craig McGee The fools are Krauss, Dawkins and you. Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life." Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass. ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity. ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html creation.com/laws-of-information-1 creation.com/laws-of-information-2 To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing". But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then. *Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.* "A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space" from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html "Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."- from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0 "That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing." from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5 And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning. www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not. From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand. Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have. ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things. www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1 "One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began." "The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem." "Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!" Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing. From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows.
Doesnt matter. We shouldn't exist in the first place. Nothing at all should even exist. Let's say a god exists. How did he even exist in the first place? How does anything come to be? Because if something comes to be out of no where how is that possible? Truth is we will never find out.
@@lionheart4552 no I wont. Not in this life is what I'm saying. Until we die more answers are found. If we die and no answers are found then that's mean there is nothing.
And, like his audience, your loudest applause was immediately following the mockery of religion every five minutes. lol, and he tried to plead "probability" of hm and Dawkins ever meeting when they both frequent radical atheist meetings. What a loon.
@@2fast2block "You learned that being a dumbass gives you orgasms watching Dawkins." Yep, you sound like a typical GoD fEAriN' ChRiStiAn... Jesus would be proud. Lolol, you people truly are the best argument for atheism...keep it up!
@S Mavi You are the perfect example of what religious fear, ignorance and indoctrination sounds like...thanks for doing your part to create more atheists, keep it up!
If you think Krauss knows what he's talking about, then you don't understand what a dumbass he is. Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life." Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass. ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity. ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html creation.com/laws-of-information-1 creation.com/laws-of-information-2 To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing". But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then. Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need. "A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space" from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html "Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."- from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0 "That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing." from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5 And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning. www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe
@@2fast2block your first link is from discovery science.I think you just let your stupid slip on that one. Fine tuning=New Age Creationism. Renaming intelligent design does not change the absurdity of it.
On Nothing. True to imagine nothing is either impossible or you're fooling yourself. The concept of nothing is simply a play on words at this point. Outside of gravity, outside of space, or outside of time still put you at some "thing", they are plays on words. At this point in time, only a ridiculous god could produce a space of nothing, and that would be nothing to consider and nothing that exists. It would be nothing short of miraculous and mean absolutely nothing to us at all. Time and space are only concepts of measure, and we can measure either, and we can add either, but when we subtract either we end up with more. Infinity is a conceptual fact, there is no end without a start, and vice versa. You would have to agree that "the concept" of "the concept of nothing" is still only a concept, to which concepts only exist in our minds and are not a reality. Gr8! Peace ☮💜
There are no "things" in modern physics. Physics only talks about properties. Strictly speaking... all of experience is only about properties, we just haven't updated our medieval languages, yet.
@@tachyontardyon237 "atheistic make-believe nonsense ? like what （・・?" Like the universe happening naturally. Clown, if you start with space, matter, and time then claim that's nothing that somehow made more space, matter, and time, you're rather a dunce.
Asolutely fantastic lecture - thank you Prof. Lawrence Krauss, I'm not very good at understanding these kinds of things usually, but you made them accessible for me.
If you have fluctuation of the number 0 it will create a number but it would need to be a symmetry to still equal 0. So if you got a 3 from 0, then there would need to be a minus -3. So if the universe was only a 3 and a -3, the universe would still equal 0 but have enough physics to create galaxies. They are symmetrically separated by space and time and the more space and time that exist the more something is created from nothing which is why our universe is expanding exponentially more and more. That is the best way I can explain.
But is this "fluctuation" you speak of inherent in 0, or is it an additional factor? If the "fluctuation" is inherent in 0, and 0 means nothing, how can nothing have inherent qualities? If it is something additional to 0, how can one say that there was "nothing" to begin with, if there was some force which initiates or operates as a fluctuation? Thanks.
*+The Lord Flashheart* That's the point, we don't know. That's why scientists are so eager to do more experiments with the Hadron Collider and discover Dark Matter with sensors deep under ground. We know this is the direction to look for that question and it could be the largest step of our understanding our universe or all universes; or it could lead us to yet another bread crumb.
Asking a Physicist (Non-Hardcore-Atheist) the explanation changes greatly, you will never get an explanation such as this one from a physicist in most respected schools and universities. This is an anti-religious presentation that doesn't actually focus on evidence. Traditional physics books don't have materialism (atheism) as a possible/plausible explanation for anything to be created, also, in the same way, physics books don't point towards specific religious views (Theism) from organised religions. However, physics points towards a possible thing or being that is probably powerful enough to be called God and able to input information into everything in the universe, and so probably intelligent. This is mind boggling, making ideas such as the multiverse to be created to remove the "intelligent" or "non-religious-creationism" part of this suppose God that science points towards, maybe this force is not an intelligent God, instead it's just something with "unlimited power" creating an unlimited number of universes constantly. You will be surprise hard-core-Atheism is as anti-scientific as hard-core-Theism. Breakdown: - Religious Physicist = Incorrectly uses science to confirm their religious views, science doesn't confirm the religious views of any current religion. - Anti-Religion Physicist = Incorrectly uses science to confirm their anti-religious views, science doesn't confirm or points towards materialism. Scientists that are not anti-religious don't claim that anything can be created from nothing. Nothing doesn't create anything, as long as "nothing" means the absence of anything of any kind. The only way around this is to define nothing as a space in time that contains sub particles, this is disingenuous, as nothing would be the absence of everything, including space, time, sub particles and anything else. - Physicist (unbiased) = Explains correctly what we currently know, and what science points towards. It will surprise you but in science books, there are possible explanations for the creation of particles and the universe as we know it, however "none of the explanations are materialistic" (atheist). Current physics doesn't explain something being created by nothing, it contradicts thermodynamics, entropy and so on. The possible explanations for anything to be created, including the universe, points towards a probable "powerful force" that could either be a thing or being that is able to create something without losing energy and probably intelligent to input mathematical values into things, this idea contributed to the idea of a "God of Espinoza" that is a term for a creator that doesn't match any religious views that we currently have. Other possible explanations point towards "advanced civilisations" creating this universe. And another possible explanation would point towards a "simulation". Just to summarise the current scientific position is that probably the universe was created by God, Aliens or we live in a simulation. Can I just say that Atheists hate this.. They prefer to make long presentations that don't actually explain Atheism as a probable cause of the universe being created and use the term "we just don't know" in the same way that religious people use the term "God done this". Still entertaining to see a anti-religious-scientist debating a religious person, they are both wrong, they both use "woo woo science", they both use mental gymnastics and their position are indefensible, best to always read and watch content from "real-unbiased-physicists" after that.
@@TheBoxingCannabyte Same I live south of downtown. But if Neil Tyson came here, Krauss should too. Mormons only make up 25% of the population in SLC. So I'm sure there wouldn't be too much of an issue if he lectures.
@@buzzin6895 They make up 25% but control 100%. I lived there (and in Ogden) for 16 years and it was the Mo-mos that drove me out. I got sick of being laid off (or outright fired) because some returning missionary needed a job. (Happened 3 times)
Krauss may do that if the audience is stupid enough to believe him. Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life." Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass. ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity. ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html creation.com/laws-of-information-1 creation.com/laws-of-information-2 To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing". But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then. *Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.* "A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space" from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html "Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."- from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0 "That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing." from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5 And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning. www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not. From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand. Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have. ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things. www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1 "One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began." "The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem." "Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!" Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing. From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows. Funny too how Epstein helped Krauss. That money wasn't from nothing, it was from someone disgusting helping another disgusting person, Krauss. www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/ ---Lawrence Krauss, a physicist who retired from Arizona State University, even continued defending Epstein after his 2008 conviction, telling the Daily Beast in 2011: “As a scientist I always judge things on empirical evidence and he always has women ages 19 to 23 around him, but I’ve never seen anything else, so as a scientist, my presumption is that whatever the problems were I would believe him over other people.” He added, “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey; I feel raised by it.”--- from: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/18/private-jets-parties-and-eugenics-jeffrey-epsteins-bizarre-world-of-scientists
":Brilliant human being. I'd love to spend some time in his brain." Are you aware there are numerous charges of sexual harassment against him and he was forced out of his teaching job as a result? But, hey, if you wanna spend time with him, go ahead. Just don't come crying that you wren't warned when his hands wander all over your body.
@@Jim-mn7yq Curations Required, please & Thank you. And I mean honest to goodness documentation, nothing for made up. I would like the seal from the governor's office or whatever office this indiscretion went through still on the paperwork. I am not one to double down when I am wrong, in light of new information, I do my due diligence and when all is said and done if the facts point in a direction that I previously did not agree with, I have to change my mind at that point and agree with the factual information. So if you are right, I would love to know.. because I would rather be right than wrong.
@@supernaturalarch666 This is the third time I've put up a post in response to your request. And each time those posts disappear. I'll try one more time. You might want to look at this: www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/university-finds-prominent-astrophysicist-lawrence-krauss-grabbed-woman-s-breast Also, you can use your favorite search engine and find all kinds of articles about many women who have come forth with accusations against Krauss.
@@yumeriagirl1231 Here is an article which mentions the actions taken against Krauss by Arizona State University. www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/university-finds-prominent-astrophysicist-lawrence-krauss-grabbed-woman-s-breast Also, you can just go to any good search engine and search. There are many many women who have alleged Krauss acted "inappropriately". Whether you find this compelling or not is up to you. But in my mind there's no question the guy's a creep and I wouldn't want any woman I cared for alone with this guy.
Einstein discovered that the attraction between objects like planets and stars occurs because their mass curves the fabric of space and time. Key word “fabric”. Quantum mechanics has further shown that what we thought was empty space (fabric) isn’t empty, it has dark matter and dark energy. That fabric jitters and sub atomic particles appear and disappear all the time. Physicists are concluding it is possible for a universe to come into being seemingly from nothing. What I don’t understand is, the “nothing” within this universe isn’t really nothing, it’s the fabric of our space-time. And that isn’t “nothing” in an absolute sense - as in absolute zero, nothing, the absence of something. Seems all we really know is that within the boundaries of our universe, there really isn't "nothing". And It also seems we still don’t understand how it’s possible to get something from nothing?
Yes, yet our universe coming from nothing does mean that the Big Bang was truly the start of the fabric of space-time. And before that there truly was nothing, no fabric of space time or existence of any dimension. Yet, that doesn’t seem to be intuitive or make much sense.
Man, I love youtube for content like this without it you would only have seen this if you were there or happend to find it somewhere but youtube makes increasing one's knowledge very easy. I have a grade 8 diploma and that's all everything I have learned has come off the internet and RUclips has helped me greatly in learning I didn't see the point of school God did it was all the answer I needed back then things have changed drastically.
"I didn't see the point of school God did it was all the answer" Great, now tell me how creation really happened since God was not needed. This will be easy for you since you made that claim. Let's see how smart you really are. Hint, you are NOT, but give me a laugh nonetheless, you clown.
@@2fast2block Tthe only thing that has ever been created is by Mankinds hands. Your question assumes that there is a creation and therefore is invalid.
Please please provide us with more videos. Mr Krauss is the best teacher in all the multi universe! May God, Allah, Moses, the universe etc. Bring nachas to mr. K.
@@gregsmith5134 a multiverse doesnt necessarilymean endless possibilitiesif those possibilitiesare illogical. It's like saying if a multiverse exists than a universe exists in which the multiverse doesnt exist.
An update: I'm not sure when exactly we learned this, so I don't know if it was before or after this talk, but apparently we aren't quite as much star dust as Krauss seems to indicate. The very early universe, for a brief time, had conditions that allowed the formation of helium and some other elements which exist in a ratio that we can apparently use to calculate the amount of matter in the universe. This video explains: ruclips.net/video/Kp_kqamkYpw/видео.html
I'm only half way through and already my mind is completely blown. I've learned stuff I'd never come across before and I've studied cosmology for years.
Yeah, you can't wait to read his books as you rub pleasuring yourself silly. It's what you sick losers do. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
From last few minutes of the talk, it raises a question - we are saying how future beings will be ignorant of things like Cosmic background or expanding universe which is crucial for explaining the mechanics of the universe. The same logic can be applied to us that some important piece of information/evidence exists no more today and we are framing the theory/story based on available data that may or may not be totally true/real.
I just finished reading his book , what an amazing book ,, awww,, He is an human with real feelings The way he took the names of Richard Feynman/Richard Dawkins and the one and only Christopher Hitchens in the book and of course during his lecture on you tube about the wonderful Carl Sagan and everything else ,, My lottery of life is winning the lottery of having time and attention to read and hear them ,, thank you Lawrence 🙏
So you thank loser Krauss for making you a loser too. Amazing. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God. So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally.
Forget the accusations of sexual misconduct etc. this is an awe-inspiring talk and should wet the appetite of any person to develop an interest in scientific research
Scientism ... we've heard it all before. If you can't bang on it with a hammer it doesn't exist. Incredible ignorance and prejudice. Dawkins is a nutter. What dark times we are in when people actually take him and his hatreds seriously.
That reminds me of a line by Sir Terry Pratchett about the odds of things happening. "Scientists have calculated that the chances of something so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten."
@@davidstokes5905 LOL@ "scientism". IT'S SCIENCE. When you can provide CREDIBLE EVIDENCE for the existence of any "god" let us know. Until then, it's all mythology and superstition.
Credible evidence of God is impossible imo...but even hypothetically i give u one...u still try for "eternity" to find the scientific reasons for that evidence (thing or phenomenon) to prove that its not an omnipotent being but just highly intelligent phenomenon or machine.... So there is no point in giving an evidence
Que viva Barcelona coño!! Estuvimos en vuestras tierra en 04 y nos encanto! restaurantes, tapas, excelente vida en la noche, personas educadas amables, excelentes museos y El Corte Inglés. Mi esposa y yo pensamos visitar otra vez, gracias, Cheers!🍻🫒🥖
No. Wrong! He bastardizes science and uses his misstatements, misinterpretations, misapplications to get you and others to hate GOD. He is using you as his minion to make himself feel better about his rebellion against God. What are you going to do when you are tossed into hell with him. He cannot help you then. He will not want to help you because he won't be able to help himself. You'll be tormented and in anguish forever because you allowed him to deceive you and fool you into believing his lies. You can change today, but it's your choice. You have to make the conscious effort to choose to change!!!!! Real science, not this bastardized evolutionary crap, always agrees with and supports Scripture!!! That's why I love true, true, science!!!!!
@@EnSabahNur-ir5mw our solar system is expanding because the sun is losing its strength in gravity. I am not against god by any means, but I am also not a believer, im what one might call a true agnostic
It depends on what you mean by special. We're not special in any philosophical, religious or metaphysical sense. But you can view life as everything is a miracle or that nothing is a miracle. And frankly I'd rather be an optimist because it's extraordinary that we are not special yet we can understand so much about the universe over the course of a very short time. To me that is exhilarating and almost spiritual akin to how Carl Sagan and Einstein viewed the universe.
I love videos like this. They make science, and genuinely important issues, even if you are not a scientist, accessible to the general population. I didn't understand some of what he said, i.e. the actual equations meant nothing to me lol, but overall, I got it :) I tend to keep videos where there's lots of info to take in in my 'Watch Later' list, so I can watch them more than once, if I ever need to refresh my memory :) Will probably watch this one again. These kind of videos are so important in this day and age, where you still have quite a lot of people in the world who are anti-science (and sadly, we are seeing a bit of a rise in anti-science sentiments ☹), or religious people who ask questions, questions that I have heard myself quite a lot in my time, like, "But how do they KNOW all this stuff? Where do they come up with the ages of things, timescales, distances etc? Science is just a bunch of guesses" etc. Also shout out to Christopher Hitchens, who recommended this talk in one of his videos- glad I searched for it :)
Krauss you are a knowledgeable man. Not everyone will understand the depth of your knowledge. I appreciate that you spend your time educating people about science and rational thinking.
+Ladyy Door www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0 CRACKWHORE; Donja THINK?! the Nobel Committee would be INTERESTED!! in Kruass answering humankind's OLDEST QUESTION?!? THEY AREN'T!! THEY WON'T BE!!! IT'S UNADULTERATED SHIT!!! I'll roll this one to you VERY SLOWLY: "Academic journal reviews" have NO OTHER FUNCTION than to "review" GASPERS of breaking science, SUPPOSEDLY as Kruass claims to have advanced. THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN NEAR Kruass' crockofshit. They'd be LAUGHED OUT OF PRINT!!! MIT physicist Ian Hutchinson said to Kruass' face: "You're not describing a universe without god.... you're describing a universe without PHYSICS." BUT!!... With 40" remaining in the debate Kruass' ONLY response was: "Nuh Uh"...a 2y/o's response! "Climbing wall/dry-ice lagoon" ASU has SOME academic pretense...Kruass HAS TO walk it all back in his idiot/ass "book". "Narcan" is EXACTLY what you need...followed by it would appear, "Methadone". Here's a long term therapy for you: Find ANYONE whom even ENTERTAINS Kruass' "atheist creation myth" OTHER THAN ANOTHER "Scientific Atheist".
+Carl Arnold You're basing your argument on the opinions of a Professor of Philosophy not a Professor of Theoretical Physics. David Albert's opinion is no more valid than any other intelligent person with a keen interest in the subject. But nether he - nor you - have any right to put his opinion on a par with Lawrence Krauss' opinion.
+Ladyy Door That makes no sense. It's like you said: a dare anyone to give me a economy video that would give me a high like this on the wonders of the universe.
@@2fast2block You're a dingbat if you think Mr. Magic Man created the universe and when asked where he came from, you say he always was. Sorry. You don't get to say he's an exception just because it's inconvenient for you. The same logic applies to everything period, and because I already know your response, I'll reply to that. If your God is not bound by logic and space/time, then how can you claim and assert he exists? You just admitted he's not bound by logic. So it all boils down to wishful thinking. So nice try. The null hypothesis or default position is to be skeptical of the God claim until there's extraordinary empirical evidence for its existence. End of story.
@@StaticBlaster "You're a dingbat if you think Mr. Magic Man created the universe" I believe God created the universe and never said "Mr. Magic Man" did. But hey, slander away but it didn't go unnoticed what a clown you are. "Sorry. You don't get to say he's an exception just because it's inconvenient for you." Shove this up your behind and see if it reaches your head... So in your way of foolish thinking, if a supernatural creator created the natural realm, then that supernatural creator who created the natural realm with its natural laws has then become also bound by those natural laws the supernatural creator created. So explain why a supernatural creator is also bound by the laws the supernatural creator created. Or, show how smart you are and just give your science for creation happening naturally and don't forget to give your science how the natural laws were created, too. If you want to act smart, it may be a good idea to actually show you are. "The null hypothesis or default position is to be skeptical of the God claim until there's extraordinary empirical evidence for its existence. End of story." Funny how you clowns who are a waste of life think you're so smart. It's hilarious. Bozo, when you tell me how God is bound by the laws He created, also throw in how you got around these laws.... Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. Make me laugh, clown, it's all you're good for.
@Baphomet the Sabbatic Goat "wow, to say all that, and call someone else a clown. You really are a deluded moron." And your evidence to show my evidence is wrong.... (blank) Yet, you being the waste of life you love to be has the gall to call me "a deluded moron." I love crushing you clowns and this is nothing compared to when you're judged by your Maker because YOU chose to ignore the evidence.
Kinda makes one wonder how much we missed over the last few thousand years by not being able to observe out into the past as it drifts from our sight. Not to mention the stuff that is technologically outside of our vision in this moment. An amazing speech about amazing stuff, or should I say about nothing.
No, it was dingbat stuff for dingbats like you. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. Learn some BASIC science or just keep on being delusional.
Perhaps we think we know the whole story of the universe but a crucial chapter is missing due to the accelerated expansion of the universe or for some other reason that's not yet been discovered.
@Dianne Lo it very difficult when you had a stroke you can see the word in you head but thwy come out wrong. Nice TRATE you have pointing that out.. Do you have many friends
Of course you do. That's because what you want to believe about the cosmos doesn't line up with what you see and therefore you have to come back here to get all ginned up at the tit of evolution and atheism so you can re-convince yourself that you're not as stupid as your conscience tells you that you are.
Krauss is nothing special in any time. He's a fool. Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life." Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass. ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity. ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html creation.com/laws-of-information-1 creation.com/laws-of-information-2 To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing". But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then. *Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.* "A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space" from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html "Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."- from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0 "That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing." from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5 And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning. www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not. From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand. Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have. ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things. www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1 "One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began." "The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem." "Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!" Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing. From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows. Funny too how Epstein helped Krauss. That money wasn't from nothing, it was from someone disgusting helping another disgusting person, Krauss. www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/ ---Lawrence Krauss, a physicist who retired from Arizona State University, even continued defending Epstein after his 2008 conviction, telling the Daily Beast in 2011: “As a scientist I always judge things on empirical evidence and he always has women ages 19 to 23 around him, but I’ve never seen anything else, so as a scientist, my presumption is that whatever the problems were I would believe him over other people.” He added, “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey; I feel raised by it.”--- from: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/18/private-jets-parties-and-eugenics-jeffrey-epsteins-bizarre-world-of-scientists
@@tonytimonis8732 😂😂 is that all you can do idiot, this krauss guy is a joke, what he says is complete nonsense, this " something from nothing " is just embarrassing and irrational, science is based on rationality, what Krauss says is irrational, he can't prove that something can come from nothing so he redefines the meaning of " nothingness ", he's a deceiver or magician that attracts naive and poor minded people like you. I'll ask you this question : is the universe existence caused or uncaused ?
@Sheerluck Holmes Mr, this is the reality, my friend. You can like it or not. But I'm so proud to be a human being when I see people who dedicate their entire life to study the wonderful universe in wich we live in.
Anybody know when Lawrence Krauss asked a question from the audience to Richard a few years ago..? Dawkins said that, that is how they met, and the question he asked was a tough one. So, anyone knows when this was, please share.
+Sachin Rao Type Neil tyson rebukes dawkins. He asks more or less the same question with krauss. Unfortunately we dont have a video with krauss asking him.
Ahhh, I never get tired of watching this video. I maybe my fourth or fifth time now and I enjoy it now as more (or more so) than the first time I saw it.
@@2fast2block Did you watch the video? Did you understand the content? The phrase "how creation came from nothing" is a question without context. What do you mean by "creation" and what does "nothing" mean. Consider "nothing" is the absence of everything, "nothing" does not have dimension or content. Is this what you mean by "nothing"? When space/time begins to exist is that "creation"? Please stop with the bumper sticker phrases and ask questions with context.
@@areliablesource2848 "What do you mean by "creation"" I mean a slice of ham, you dingbat. You clown asking what creation means. And, you're serious. This is the crap brain you got with Krauss. But wait, if that wasn't silly enough, hold on, another question... "and what does "nothing" mean." Have you ever heard the word "dictionary"? Have you made it past grade school yet? "Consider "nothing" is the absence of everything" Really, consider? Well, so it's somehow really not, not a single thing? "When space/time begins to exist is that "creation"?" What's next, does 2 + 2 = 4?
@@2fast2block ... and yet you don't have an answer. Just for clarification; "nothing" is the absence of everything. Space, time, energy and matter; all gone, nothing. Can you come to grips what "nothing" means? You can't describe nothing because once you start naming what it is then it is no longer "nothing". Now tell me what is "creation". Is it when there is energy in the "nothing"? Or, are you hung up on the "creation" story in that cave man fairy tail called the bible?
@@areliablesource2848 looky here, after all I wrote your worthless life then ask.... "Can you come to grips what "nothing" means?" Can you read? Can you think? Then, you clown, hits some kind of revelation.... "You can't describe nothing because once you start naming what it is then it is no longer "nothing"." Really? Can you tell Krauss that? "Or, are you hung up on the "creation" story in that cave man fairy tail called the bible?" Bozo, last I checked, the bible starts with a supernatural creation, not a natural one. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. But to you the bible is a ""creation" story in that cave man fairy tail called the bible?" Great, so you then know the real way creation happened that got around those laws. Are you done getting your orgasms with your useless questions because you can't read? Likely not, you dingbat. But continue to make me laugh, clown, and tell me how you got around those laws.
Do I understand even 1% of this? No. But Lawrence Krauss brings his subject alive and makes it fascinating. I also love his sharp, self deprecating wit. Excellent. Thanks.
i would side with some religious people that comment on here to protect their beliefs.but then i remember that for hundreds of years they were burning people on a stake for mentioning that the earth spins around the sun and that we are not the center of the universe, of course opposing their belief that a virgin gave birth to a child that was given the seed from the creator of everything and still ended up getting brutally murdered. OH I ALMOST FORGOT the creator of everything made immortal people, planted a tree with a serpent and delicious fruit, gave them traits that will disobey him and banishes them and curses them with mortality after they do so.
Yo dawg people will kill each other en masse in the name of Communism. People don't need to be religious to enact horrific deeds. As to the ridiculous fables of yore, when people know more we will seem just as goofy with what we envisioned as being true.
No, he feeds you carbage. Start thinking for a change. Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing." Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
@@wolfgangouille no, loser gave it and loser you can't get around the science I gave either. All a loser has to do is say blah-blah and then you'll say it was a "scientist" even when they are braindead and gave NO science to make their point. You're a loser just as they are.
The real problem is that no one seems able to agree on what "Nothing" actually IS. Yet it's obviously important, because a lot of people make a big deal about Nothing. Freddie Mercury said "Nothing really matters" towards the end of an iconic Queen song. Even the sitcom "Seinfeld" was described as the show about Nothing.
Bro you have chosen to go to hell becouse you believe lawrens kraus hawking dawkins please tell me where hawking now is he in paradise in his grave or hell in his grave
@@ANUJ.7if they believe what you believe they will go to hell but if you believe in what they your frienda believe you will go to paradise insha-allah i pray to God to help you get his massege😊
When listening to the various explanations for a universe from nothing, a critical thinker will observe that there must be special requirements for this “nothing.” These include: empty space > a law of quantum gravity > some sort of “laws of nature” > variable of time so that the equations of quantum mechanics can be meaningful > a “false vacuum” and a multiverse from which our universe can expand from some other empty space containing zero energy and mass. Obviously (at least to a physicist) none of these things qualify as “absolutely nothing at all.” Yet this is precisely what is needed if Krauss’s argument is to deliver what many atheists think it promises.
A critical thinker doesn't necessarily know what they're talking about, and doesn't sound smarter when he, by fiat, declares that there MUST be this list of properties of a thing we don't know exists because he is uncomfortable.
"The first gulp of the glass of the natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you" - Werner Heisenberg
@@panjandrum.conundrum How's that the uncertainty principle? Nice approach non the less, but the quote would beter be interpreted as what it describes. When you start looking, it looks like there is no need or proof for a god. When you keep looking and get a bigger picture and understanding, the obviousness of a 'greater than thou mortals' conscience becomes hard to miss/apparent. FYI, Freemasons can only join said club when they acknowledge a 'supreme being'. Masons obviously are also a club that's very serious about science. Science in itself was originally created to look past the simple, naïve and limited perception of the human mind, with the goal to find, understand and behold the glory of God. People were like that back then. Now all people think science is about it seems, is disproving a god or superior being, conscience. I think Krauss seems amazingly smart and at the same time IS ridiculously logically inconsistent. And I find him very creepy, not sure why though...
I love science too because it increases and reconfirms my faith in God! For the believer there is plenty of evidence. For the skeptic no amount of evidence is sufficient.
What if someone told you it's not? And that once we get to the point where we're tired of being led by the carrot to eat the carrot and search for a new one repeatedly for the rest of our days, that it won't feel satisfying and beautiful? All life gives us is essentially drugs to be addicted to. Addicted to attention, addicted to money, addicted to video games, and addicted to well, searching. God is steady and we all know deep down that the idea of loving relativity and mystery and the "undefined" is something we were taught to do, not created to do. Praying may God lead you to His merciful love 🙏
wow, I was expecting the comment section to be grateful for this video and the amazing insights. Instead it's full of people who actually think they're smarter than these great intellectuals.
intelectuals?? Krauss is just a bitter atheist! apparently he grew bored of mere science and decided to start fooling other people who has also never seen GOD......
@@badjohnnyisbad, so by answering my comment you admit also to be fooled by Krauss?... you never seen me, yet you can't deny I exist....hence this answer. it's the same logic, so, unless you can definitely prove that God does not exist....keep quiet 😂 🤣 😁...
@@badjohnnyisbad, well ain't that just convenient? hey everybody, JB here can "dismiss" God!!.... ain't JB something to behold!! i bet there's an angel knocking on God's room; "Sr, master my lord, something terrible has just happened, someone who goes by JB sr..... he.... he's dismiss you lord!!.... and he said.... he also said you don't exist!!... -no but seriously, for a simple human, a pile of flesh held together by some weak pitiful bones, to say God does not exist....!!? that's something that cracks me up....(but no, I am not lmao....)
A great lecture. "the atoms on your left hand come a different galaxy than the atoms on your right hand." I will buy my son a telescope and tell him this.
@@2fast2block you get about a bit dude. There's a way more plausible explanation, you just deny it. To think an immortal sky daddy, poofed into existence, somehow, then poofed everything what into existence is so ludicrous it doesn't warrant any thought. Like children thinking magic bunny rabbits crap out chocolate eggs at Easter, you sir, have been duped
@@poozer1986 me previously...Well, the bible starts out with God's supernatural creation. Do you know how creation happened another way? B-itch, here's some BASIC science you never learned, obviously. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW this. So clown, give me a laugh how you got around this.
@@thecrownjewel2759 *WHAT* is an "intrinsic property of nature" ? You're left with Infinite regression. Where did nature come from? What brought about the intrinsic properties of nature? (I don't believe in any "God", personal or otherwise, by the way).
It was interesting but I don't get it... Basically he said.. Religus people ask him all the time how can something come from nothing He said if you zero energy. By quantum fluctuations you can get something.... Well quantum fluctuations are somthing... So there ecan never be nothing...
@@vashnanerada8757 Krauss never cared what science proves. He cares about lying to his fellow losers. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God. So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally.
57:00 " if a baby universe where to form, from the inside it would look like it is expanding but from the outside is would look like a black hole." So dark energy is gravity seen from an other angle. So every black hole is a white hole and a universe depending on where you look at it. So quantum fluctuations also fluctuate at large scale, generating energy differential, wich generates a flow of matter (we call gravity) into streams (filaments) and pooling into clumps growing into black hole. (Quantum gravity for you) Other visualisation: Cymatics. The area that have large amplitude "repelles" the sand that gathers in smaller amplitude area. The vibration acts like a conveyor belt of matter. The vibration acts like gravity. It is not that spacetime is bent by matter. Spacetime vibrates and the vibration is crushed by matter. But like a battle rope, the vibration is pushing matter. It looks like the pilot wave theory. Let me know what you think. Enjoy Edit: if at the center of a hypothetical hollow planet we experience zero gravity, then the same applies at the center of a black hole. So zero gravity at the center of a black hole. Spacetime being stretched looks like expansion from the point of view of the singularity. A white hole would look like a big bang.
Krauss and Dawkins are fools. Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life." Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass. ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity. ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html creation.com/laws-of-information-1 creation.com/laws-of-information-2 To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing". But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then. *Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.* "A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space" from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html "Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."- from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0 "That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing." from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5 And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning. www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not. From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand. Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have. ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things. www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1 "One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began." "The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem." "Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!" Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing. From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows. Funny too how Epstein helped Krauss. That money wasn't from nothing, it was from someone disgusting helping another disgusting person, Krauss. www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/ ---Lawrence Krauss, a physicist who retired from Arizona State University, even continued defending Epstein after his 2008 conviction, telling the Daily Beast in 2011: “As a scientist I always judge things on empirical evidence and he always has women ages 19 to 23 around him, but I’ve never seen anything else, so as a scientist, my presumption is that whatever the problems were I would believe him over other people.” He added, “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey; I feel raised by it.”--- from: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/18/private-jets-parties-and-eugenics-jeffrey-epsteins-bizarre-world-of-scientists
Amazing talk sir. You made me think about taking up astronomy after my engg graduation. I'll never stop learning. I'll study all sciences or at least most of it though in brief or in detail.
You're a dumbass now to believe Krauss. You're rather hopeless no matter what you take. Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life." Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass. ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity. ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html creation.com/laws-of-information-1 creation.com/laws-of-information-2 To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing". But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then. *Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.* "A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space" from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html "Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."- from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0 "That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing." from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5 And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning. www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not. From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand. Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have. ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things. www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1 "One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began." "The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem." "Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!" Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing. From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows.
@@psilvakimo Love it! When Krauss heard that song he must have thought, "Well, I'll just change the meaning of nothing this way I can sell a book to dumbasses called A Universe From Nothing."
I'm so glad I finally watched this lecture. So interesting and fascinating. Still, correct me if I'm wrong, does he really equivocate the word nothing? Because when I think of nothing it's absence of time, space and matter and even the laws of nature, but he defines it as this vacuum. Can someone explain it if he or she knows?
I think he said: Vacuum energy is [positive] and equal to gravity [negative] when there was a singularity. Gravity is negative for a split second at the start of the universe.
I disliked it. I see the insanity of these clowns. Oh, but wait, you are sure of yourself. Do tell how creation happened naturally and include evidence.
@@2fast2block Nobody knows this with any justification or evidence, and certainly not theists. There is no evidence that G-d exists, let along that G-d created anything. You can more easily - and more probably - just say the universe created itself. At least there is evidence here of existence, though of course not of any role as prime mover. Not that the real question of first cause can really be answered anyway. It's a cliche that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but there are actually many times when this is not necessarily true. In the case of G-d, you might think there would be at least some evidence, but there isn't any at all. Hard to accept maybe, but facts are facts. Meanwhile, great mysteries remain, at least for those with enough courage to face them. I actually am a theist btw, but these atheists have the advantage of being just about the only actually smart, educated, and most importantly honest people discussing these matters.
@@adreaminxy blah, blah, then, "and more probably - just say the universe created itself." That is impossible and you gave NO evidence how that can be. You just listened to dingbat Krauss and you can't explain a natural creation. "In the case of G-d, you might think there would be at least some evidence, but there isn't any at all." Punk, let me teach you some basic science since it is clear you don't know it. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW those laws, punk. Now, stop being a wuss pretending we don't know and get around those laws. It should be easy for you since you have on your side, "these atheists have the advantage of being just about the only actually smart, educated, and most importantly honest people discussing these matters." Again, wimp, do tell how creation happened naturally and include evidence. How many times will you reply and not give evidence? You must love being the clown you've always been.
@@2fast2block You are very sure of your own self for someone who is only parroting a couple of talking points that are, whether you can recognize it or not, rather pitiful non sequiturs. All you have there is wishful thinking and assertions without evidence. Again, it is on the surface more probable that the universe created itself since there is absolutely no evidence of G-d or anything supernatural. But I'm not the one claiming to know something that nobody does. That's you, apparently. Speaking of wimps, who here is desperate for a celestial daddy figure to ease the fear and uncertainty of living in what is by all appearances - at least according to all the actual evidence - an indifferent universe? You are of course free to believe whatever you want, as I do, but you have no actual evidence, no matter what your limited education has led you to imagine about the laws of thermodynamics which are of course only known insofar as they have been empirically verified.
@@adreaminxy "All you have there is wishful thinking and assertions without evidence." Says the clown who can't get around what science I gave. "But I'm not the one claiming to know something that nobody does. That's you, apparently." You have, dingbat, "All you have there is wishful thinking and assertions without evidence." Clown, we know those laws and lying and being a wimp does not make them go away. "but you have no actual evidence, no matter what your limited education has led you to imagine about the laws of thermodynamics which are of course only known insofar as they have been empirically verified." Is there a reason you want to go on living being the waste of life and resources you are? We know that science and you can't get around them, bozo. Stop pretending to be smart when you are the exact opposite. Still, keep on embarrassing yourself, I don't care about you if you don't.
I am a Christian man who also loves science - I like to listen to gentlemen like Mr. Krauss and even Dawkins. I feel it is important to seek other points of view without painting them into a dogmatic corner as they often tend to do with those of us who believe the universe is created. I have pulled a few quotes that struck me as an example - along with a few a follow-up notes. If anyone is interested it would be great to correspond - not demean one another but to engage in a spirited exchange of ideas. "Fairy tales that are made up, um, in most religious, um, situations" - I realize this is a common characteristic made against the Bible by scientists to reject a creation based existence - but the reality is there are many scientists who believe in the God of the Bible - but this blanket statement is simply not true. "Excitement of learning about the universe and that again is so different than the sterile aspect of religion which excitement is apparently knowing everything although really knowing nothing" - I don't think I know everything, not even close, in fact the more I know the more I realize I don't know. What I do have is a guidebook to dive into, to get a small glimpse as it relates to the majesty of my creator. "What you take from it depends on your religious and metaphysical beliefs, but whatever you think the Big Bang happened" - so here Mr. Krauss sites a beginning, a starting point labeled the big bang - Wouldn't one need to then surmise the cause of such an event - a Big Banger? My counterpart may ask then who created God. But the God of the Bible is the cause first cause, the Logos, He is eternal and outside of time and space as we know it - God has no beginning and no end. "Richard wrote a great book called, arr, I, oh, what's it called? Are ancestors? What's it called (asking Richard) ancestor's tale, yes, I wanted to make sure I got that right" - Sorry, I just thought this was humorous - a great book, but what's the title? "you are all stardust, you couldn't be here if stars hadn't exploded, cuz 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 only way they can 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" - This touches on so many topics that are debatable but Mr. Krauss has now introduced abiogenesis, which is life from non-life. As one example of how modern science is pointing out (Dr. Douglas Axe) the astronomically high degree of CHANCE it would take to form just a single protein molecule of 150 amino acids (small as protein molecules go) would be 10 to the 77 power! Sorry I cannot finish my response as my lunch break is over - I work with an outstanding group of people at the Hadron Collider facility.
@Ψ My friend, it's because the scientific community is so entrenched in the denial of a creator or a mind that it will continue to go ignored - but not for long as real fact-based studies such as Dr. Axe has done will rise to the surface and will not be able to be ignored for much longer. As we can continue study the universe including the complexity life - I have no doubt it will further to point to a Mind. But please consider that you will be dead for a very long time - not for me but for your sake please ask God to reveal himself to you - in your own private time - what harm will that have?
"so here Mr. Krauss sites a beginning, a starting point labeled the big bang - Wouldn't one need to then surmise the cause of such an event - a Big Banger? My counterpart may ask then who created God. But the God of the Bible is the cause first cause, the Logos, He is eternal and outside of time and space as we know it - God has no beginning and no end." How can you have watched this. The entire talk, everything that was said, even the title of the video, and not have gotten what it's all about. He's lecturing on one thing. The universe can come from nothing. Everything we have observed shows us that the universe we live in is one where it's not just possible, but likely to have come from absolutely nothing. There is no need for a god in this equation. Everything we see and learn leads us to there being no need for a "Big Banger". You completely missed the point of this lecture.
That's really interesting about virtual particles, but I agree with some of the comments in that empty space is not the same as nothing. Nothing would mean not empty space, but no space. How can there be a quantum fluctuation if there is no space? Where did space come from?
Indeed. His idea presupposes a parent system likewise governed by physical laws, from which our universe spawned into temporary existence. I think it does not really address the origin question (often filled by gods) at all. The whole business of existence and non-existence has to be among the weirdest realms of thought I have encountered in my life. I hope to do a video on that some time.
I think it addresses the origin question quite well. No one believes in a literal philosophical nothing. Even the religious believe there was God. But the laws of physics could define the role of God. The fundamental laws of physics could be infinite and eternal and the reason behind everything therefore why not just describe that as God?
I would argue that the question of why there is something rather than nothing does not make any sense.. The reason being is that the answer is so counter intuitive and beyond any human logic that it dos’nt make any sense to us, it is just abstract gobbledegook..
@@neosodon9895 But we can't know wether nothingness is possible or not. If non extistence is possible then then the Universe had obviously have to come into existence. I am okay with the big crunch cycles happening within our existence but this doesn't explain 'existence'
The absence of time,matter,energy and gravity is NOT nothing, as postulated by Krauss. Before those there were quantum fluctuatuations,SOME LAWS of PHYSICS, INFORMATION-DATA. You can not avoid GOD, the Creator. I am a deist, not a Christian. Tom Jefferson and Ben Franklin are among my heros.I WOULD LOVE TO SEE A DEBATE BETWEEN KRAUSS AND HUGH ROSS!!!
@@christopherharper6229 people allways asking who created God , God was not created , God has allways been and allways will be, Not a physical being but a super natural force that humanity has given a name too. God is the Universe.
Great video, first watched it years later and still worth hearing again. The jabs at religion are unnecessary. The lecture and science are interesting enough without them, and will keep me from recommending this video to some of my friends.
I don't think so, a majority of the people on earth today are still religious, even tho we have the knowledge to disprove them, so when he actually talks about something that disprove the ideas of religion, there is nothing wrong with taking 10s to mention it and explain it.
9 out of 10 scientists mention Einstein and Newton.After ww1, there was a scientist who spoke all Europian languages fluently and brought scientists that where divided in 2 groups together. I was loved by all scientists and was a mentor to Einstein. Einstein adore him and look up to him. Did experiments together and Einstein stayed at his place (house) many times. He had a theory called now relativity theory before Einstein. He was very humble at dare not to publish it so close after the war. His name Lorentz. Also Newton got his laws from Christiaan Huygens. But those scientists are from small countries and not famous and (anglo), so are ignored. Scientists nowadays are well aducated Parrots.
This is f***** crazy😮😮. Insane. To be able to explain us these complex topics in this much simpler language is ART.
Each time I come back to this video it amazes me how much I've picked up between views. What a great teaching tool RUclips has become. From Darwin to Dawkins, Sagan to Hawking, Russell to Hitchens. If I had this in grade school, the science(s) would have been my chosen career path. As for now, it's an awesome past time/hobby.
igious
YY55YUUU
you are easily conned and impressed
@@bretzajac7986 what do you mean
@@danieljoseph6404 i mean to make up your mind and declare it fact with little to no study because some guys says it and you do not fact check shows how easily conned and impressed people are.
@@bretzajac7986 sounds like people who believe in quran,bible etc to me....
I watched this video in 2011 for the first time. Since then I've watched it at least two times a year. I never get tired of it. It was also the gateway to find hundreds of other lectures on this and other scientific topics, including the lectures of Richard Dawkins, of course. I've also watched lots of debates between religion and science, with participants like Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins et.al. not to forget the brilliant Christopher Hitchens, of course! May he rest in peace; even though I believe his former, still active, opponents rest in an even greater peace.
I've even had the patience to listen to the debates vs the tedious theist, William Lane Craig, with his monotone, slightly annoying voice. Without his fallacious arguments, and often pure lies, he wouldn't have anything to say. So in a way I forgive the theists for that. Without those arguments, even though empty, there wouldn't be any of those debates, where you could watch and hear them embarrass themselves ...
/Kjell Adrian from Sweden
Oh, WLC...The guy who said the holy spirit is real because he personally experiences it? Yeah, he's a real pleasure to listen to.
Thank you!
Seriously same for me this was my gateway video
I feel like my mind is having a nuclear explosion inside another nuclear explosion! this is way better than any sci-fi movie or book I could've ever read or watched. Thank you so much for posting this eloquent lecture! I'm in love!
This IS science fiction, dingbat.
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
@@2fast2block stop trying to spew the same nonsense hey bud. What a complete idiot you are, you don't even see how badly your misrepresenting the laws of thermodynamics
I wish, I'd had teachers like him 🎉
"The universe is huge and old, and rare things happen all the time"... Such a great line.
"...including life." ........now it is a great line.
Anyone can guess that, I don't know why that's such a great line. Saying life is an accident is pure speculation.
It is also rather banal
@@whade62000 ...yeah, it might be droll even for Bill the Cat's tastes.
You wouldn't believe today.
Today's Britain is the ouzing of decades.
DJT is considered as a saviour...
You Brits have failed as a people, and as a person as a potentially sane person. You get special interrogation routes...
Fuck you and your love for child abuse!
Never would've thought I would rewatch a youtube video that's above the hour mark so many times, this is beyond brilliant!
No, you're beyond stu--pid to call this brilliant.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
@@2fast2block Did you even watch the video? Krauss does a pretty good job explaining how the universe can form without breaking any laws in physics. Virtual particles, as Krauss already explained, can be observed to form without consuming any pre existing energy or matter. And in a flat universe no positive energy is required.
On a quantum scale the universe behaves very differently from the universe on a human scale. The universe began as a point of infinite density. In such an environment our common sense understanding physics breaks down. If your not curious at all and just want to presuppose God why are you even watching this.
@@neosodon9895 why you want to act as if you're smart is beyond me. Look at your stupidity...
"Krauss does a pretty good job explaining how the universe can form without breaking any laws in physics. Virtual particles, as Krauss already explained, can be observed to form without consuming any pre existing energy or matter. And in a flat universe no positive energy is required."
You complete loser, he started with space, matter, and time already being there then just calls it "nothing." You are an embarrassment. Oh, but go ahead and tell me how that's nothing. He can't so he admits it's something after all. You are like him, you lie to yourself so you can accept the dung. That's why you're full of it, you loser.
@@2fast2block I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my first reply. I could explain it in more detail but based on your reply it is apparent that would be a waste of time. You're not at all interested in the science. You're only trolling for a fight and venting your hatred of anything that confronts your religious dogma. Thanks for showing everyone what your faith is all about. It's people like you that are fueling the rapid decline of religion in the developed world.
@@neosodon9895 Look at you run because you're stuck showing what a loser you are...
"I could explain it in more detail but...."
You're a liar that can't face what I said, he started with space, matter, and time already being there then just calls it "nothing." You are an embarrassment.
That is SO clear only some stu---pid person can miss it. All you jokes do is provide humor.
The religion in my country indoctrinated me without my permission, and now that I’m free from that nonsense come here and my brain is absolutely in love with this wonderful lecture, THIS SHOULD BE SHOWN TO SCHOOLS
Not only this should be shown in schools. If you are from USA where the Christian religion abounds and where creationists populate the country…… schools should officially teach evolution
Humility: ' We don't understand everything ', thus, ' We'll continue discovering more and more of the Universe.' Which makes it exciting as the Mystery of the Universe will keep us going. I think...Thank you Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss.
In space no one can smell your farts
(Carl Sagan lecture 1979)
"A Universe From Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss. Just amazing video!
#physics #science #reason
Got this book on my list :)
Must read the book...I flicked through its pages and it seemed extremely interesting.
Inaki SB
Really don't waste your money. Read a real science book, this is pure speculation, and play on words.
Dick Dawkins Any other non-speculative, more-scientific, recommended book about the subject, please?
Dick Dawkins Whats your point? What real science book do you recommend? Can you expand on what you refer to as speculation?
"forget jesus. The stars died so we could be here" - brilliant.
*mic drop*
@@rachellebrady1517 yep. He should have ended with that comment, dropped his mic, and walked off stage. Lol
They didnt die. They evolved and became us!
Its always the same only the form is changing.
@@adriansevic3192 I'm only quoting Lawrence Krauss, fool. I don't need you to be a condescending ass.
That wasn't "brilliant," it was empty. First we need a universe that included stars. Oh, not to mention then we needed life starting too on its own. Krauss and you are a joke.
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God.
So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally.
Lawrence shirt hs exactly the same atoms as the wallpaper behind him.
All religions are false and empty. Man made. That does not mean there isn’t something bigger...
@Craig G HE'S STRUTTIN A BIG HAT NOW ! LOLOLOL IDENTITY CRISIS I GUESS.
@@clayz1 RELIGIONS DID GET IT ALL WRONG. BUT NDE'S HAVE PROVEN THE AFTERLIFE IS REAL.
I'm so glad there is no law requiring we match the walls. I suppose if Bloomberg is elected it could happen.
Lawrence is composed of theorized matter which is thought to be only perceptions of consciousness.
He's one of the sweetest people I've ever seen in my life.
and even sweeter when he debates religious folks
Well he is a Jeffrey Epstein apologist and friend. So I would be a little careful with that statement...
Even though I don't understand 50% of what he says, I could listen to Lawrence Krauss for hours.
Because you worship him instead of God.
@@charitablecitizen2332 I don't worship anyone
@@charitablecitizen2332 I just like how eloquently he speaks
@@charitablecitizen2332 we leave pathetic worship to idiotic theists.
@@charitablecitizen2332
Sad child
I think '' We are all fucked '', would have been a good name for the book.
true
***** No problem
Yes, our time is certainly short in Cosmo Time.
A book, an album title or better yet ... a sermon. LOL
Rip Hitchens
wow what a wonderful lecture. i always liked Dr. Krauss but he seems so abrasive when on a panel with other scientists. i know he's generally trying to lighten the mood but it always rubbed me the wrong way. when he speaks on his own he's just astonishing to listen to.
+BadKidAdvil This is usually what happens between people that have big ideas and stong arguments to support them, I used to have the same feeling about him, though the mini-fights that he had with Tyson are so amusing. He is a great aducator when you let him finish his sentences :P
That tends to happen with really smart and intelligent people. I tried reading Krauss' PhD paper and let's just say I could barely keep up with the prose portion, let alone the mathematics. The guy knows what he's talking about folks like him and should be taken seriously and given much more credence that people in funny hats that purport to know everything about everything. Piffle!
Michael Craig McGee I watched that debate! Krauss was a verbal thug, overly emotional, hurling insults at every turn, but undeniably correct in his arguments. Craig was poised and scholarly, never rising to Krauss's barbs, but ultimately came off as a skilled sophist. I can see why Dawkins won't debate him. There isn't much there, just better-worded, better-articulated versions of the same stuff we usually hear. A fifth-degree black belt in logical fallacies always loses to a bar brawler who's right.
abdul it's autism associated with intelligence. people with high is have ridiculous egos. not their fault, as they are smarter than 99%. ironic because you can see a person's iq based on the principle. the smartest people are those like Musk who are so higher than Hawkings, that they don't have an ego. because they feel alone
@Michael Craig McGee The fools are Krauss, Dawkins and you.
Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life."
Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html
That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass.
ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html
Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity.
ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html
creation.com/laws-of-information-1
creation.com/laws-of-information-2
To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing".
But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then.
*Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.*
"A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space"
from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html
"Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."-
from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
"That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing."
from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5
And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning.
www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html
kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe
I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not.
From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand.
Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have.
ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html
Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things.
www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1
"One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began."
"The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem."
"Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!"
Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing
You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing.
From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows.
"Forget Jesus, the stars died for you". Absolutely Beautiful
Doesnt matter. We shouldn't exist in the first place. Nothing at all should even exist. Let's say a god exists. How did he even exist in the first place? How does anything come to be? Because if something comes to be out of no where how is that possible? Truth is we will never find out.
Playing with words, means you know shit.But, it works for some ppl though.
@@jeremiahbriney4899 Yes you will
@@lionheart4552 no I wont. Not in this life is what I'm saying. Until we die more answers are found. If we die and no answers are found then that's mean there is nothing.
We are stardust or nuclear waste depending on how you want to describe it said Christopher Hitchens.
my mind is blown, and i clapped while laying in bed watching this in the middle of the night. i wished this lecture was infinite.
you sound very strange
And, like his audience, your loudest applause was immediately following the mockery of religion every five minutes. lol, and he tried to plead "probability" of hm and Dawkins ever meeting when they both frequent radical atheist meetings. What a loon.
@@2fast2block "You learned that being a dumbass gives you orgasms watching Dawkins." Yep, you sound like a typical GoD fEAriN' ChRiStiAn... Jesus would be proud. Lolol, you people truly are the best argument for atheism...keep it up!
@S Mavi You are the perfect example of what religious fear, ignorance and indoctrination sounds like...thanks for doing your part to create more atheists, keep it up!
@@bretzajac7986 And you sound rather unpleasant.
If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics.
Richard Feynman
I pity the fool that doesn't understand quantum mechanics. - Dr. T
Feynman is a favorite of mine, Krauss, OTOH, is a piece of cr@p..
If you think Krauss knows what he's talking about, then you don't understand what a dumbass he is.
Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life."
Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html
That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass.
ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html
Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity.
ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html
creation.com/laws-of-information-1
creation.com/laws-of-information-2
To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing".
But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then.
Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.
"A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space"
from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html
"Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."-
from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
"That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing."
from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5
And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning.
www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html
kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe
@@2fast2block your first link is from discovery science.I think you just let your stupid slip on that one. Fine tuning=New Age Creationism. Renaming intelligent design does not change the absurdity of it.
@@2fast2block Dover vs. Kitzmiller. Mic drop
On Nothing. True to imagine nothing is either impossible or you're fooling yourself. The concept of nothing is simply a play on words at this point. Outside of gravity, outside of space, or outside of time still put you at some "thing", they are plays on words. At this point in time, only a ridiculous god could produce a space of nothing, and that would be nothing to consider and nothing that exists. It would be nothing short of miraculous and mean absolutely nothing to us at all. Time and space are only concepts of measure, and we can measure either, and we can add either, but when we subtract either we end up with more. Infinity is a conceptual fact, there is no end without a start, and vice versa. You would have to agree that "the concept" of "the concept of nothing" is still only a concept, to which concepts only exist in our minds and are not a reality. Gr8! Peace ☮💜
There are no "things" in modern physics. Physics only talks about properties. Strictly speaking... all of experience is only about properties, we just haven't updated our medieval languages, yet.
I don’t understand a thing about astrophysics, but I enjoyed what I heard.
do you pray to astrophysics ?
or do you have faith in astrophysics ?
Science is methods for dealing with physical creation without useless opinions and conclusions.
You heard a lot of atheistic make-believe nonsense.
atheistic make-believe nonsense ?
like what （・・？
let's talk it over here …
↓
chat.whatsapp.com/LT8eYjMxtza7uZ9tnqgZkf
@@tachyontardyon237 "atheistic make-believe nonsense ?
like what （・・?"
Like the universe happening naturally. Clown, if you start with space, matter, and time then claim that's nothing that somehow made more space, matter, and time, you're rather a dunce.
@Samael "and now I now more than I learned in my whole life."
Wonderful, do explain how creation happened naturally. Let's see what you learned.
Thank you For all you've done to progress humanity.
Jason Theobald
You’re very welcome.
This was a joke, not "progress" you clown.
@@2fast2block coming from an idiot, who doesn't understand reality, science or anything for that matter
Progress like saying siblings can marry 😂
@@intalmdr4627 care to elaborate
Krauss and Dawkins , right or wrong do give me faith in humanity.
Asolutely fantastic lecture - thank you Prof. Lawrence Krauss, I'm not very good at understanding these kinds of things usually, but you made them accessible for me.
I can't grasp how something can come from nothing. I hope you can define nothing? Thanks
If you have fluctuation of the number 0 it will create a number but it would need to be a symmetry to still equal 0. So if you got a 3 from 0, then there would need to be a minus -3. So if the universe was only a 3 and a -3, the universe would still equal 0 but have enough physics to create galaxies. They are symmetrically separated by space and time and the more space and time that exist the more something is created from nothing which is why our universe is expanding exponentially more and more.
That is the best way I can explain.
But is this "fluctuation" you speak of inherent in 0, or is it an additional factor? If the "fluctuation" is inherent in 0, and 0 means nothing, how can nothing have inherent qualities? If it is something additional to 0, how can one say that there was "nothing" to begin with, if there was some force which initiates or operates as a fluctuation?
Thanks.
*+The Lord Flashheart* That's the point, we don't know. That's why scientists are so eager to do more experiments with the Hadron Collider and discover Dark Matter with sensors deep under ground. We know this is the direction to look for that question and it could be the largest step of our understanding our universe or all universes; or it could lead us to yet another bread crumb.
+Jolly Joel Okay, thanks for taking the time to respond!
Asking a Physicist (Non-Hardcore-Atheist) the explanation changes greatly, you will never get an explanation such as this one from a physicist in most respected schools and universities. This is an anti-religious presentation that doesn't actually focus on evidence. Traditional physics books don't have materialism (atheism) as a possible/plausible explanation for anything to be created, also, in the same way, physics books don't point towards specific religious views (Theism) from organised religions. However, physics points towards a possible thing or being that is probably powerful enough to be called God and able to input information into everything in the universe, and so probably intelligent. This is mind boggling, making ideas such as the multiverse to be created to remove the "intelligent" or "non-religious-creationism" part of this suppose God that science points towards, maybe this force is not an intelligent God, instead it's just something with "unlimited power" creating an unlimited number of universes constantly. You will be surprise hard-core-Atheism is as anti-scientific as hard-core-Theism.
Breakdown:
- Religious Physicist = Incorrectly uses science to confirm their religious views, science doesn't confirm the religious views of any current religion.
- Anti-Religion Physicist = Incorrectly uses science to confirm their anti-religious views, science doesn't confirm or points towards materialism. Scientists that are not anti-religious don't claim that anything can be created from nothing. Nothing doesn't create anything, as long as "nothing" means the absence of anything of any kind. The only way around this is to define nothing as a space in time that contains sub particles, this is disingenuous, as nothing would be the absence of everything, including space, time, sub particles and anything else.
- Physicist (unbiased) = Explains correctly what we currently know, and what science points towards. It will surprise you but in science books, there are possible explanations for the creation of particles and the universe as we know it, however "none of the explanations are materialistic" (atheist). Current physics doesn't explain something being created by nothing, it contradicts thermodynamics, entropy and so on. The possible explanations for anything to be created, including the universe, points towards a probable "powerful force" that could either be a thing or being that is able to create something without losing energy and probably intelligent to input mathematical values into things, this idea contributed to the idea of a "God of Espinoza" that is a term for a creator that doesn't match any religious views that we currently have. Other possible explanations point towards "advanced civilisations" creating this universe. And another possible explanation would point towards a "simulation". Just to summarise the current scientific position is that probably the universe was created by God, Aliens or we live in a simulation. Can I just say that Atheists hate this.. They prefer to make long presentations that don't actually explain Atheism as a probable cause of the universe being created and use the term "we just don't know" in the same way that religious people use the term "God done this".
Still entertaining to see a anti-religious-scientist debating a religious person, they are both wrong, they both use "woo woo science", they both use mental gymnastics and their position are indefensible, best to always read and watch content from "real-unbiased-physicists" after that.
I'll have to buy the book, because there's so much going on here I can't take it all in at one sitting.
Excellent lecture by a very good speaker. Very witty and entertaining.
I would love for professor Krauss to give a science lecture in Salt Lake City Utah.
Same! after the pandemic, lol. I live in SLC, UT too, near downtown, basically right by the Fair Grounds.
@@TheBoxingCannabyte Same I live south of downtown. But if Neil Tyson came here, Krauss should too. Mormons only make up 25% of the population in SLC. So I'm sure there wouldn't be too much of an issue if he lectures.
@@buzzin6895 They make up 25% but control 100%. I lived there (and in Ogden) for 16 years and it was the Mo-mos that drove me out. I got sick of being laid off (or outright fired) because some returning missionary needed a job. (Happened 3 times)
Krauss may do that if the audience is stupid enough to believe him.
Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life."
Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html
That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass.
ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html
Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity.
ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html
creation.com/laws-of-information-1
creation.com/laws-of-information-2
To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing".
But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then.
*Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.*
"A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space"
from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html
"Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."-
from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
"That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing."
from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5
And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning.
www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html
kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe
I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not.
From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand.
Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have.
ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html
Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things.
www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1
"One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began."
"The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem."
"Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!"
Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing
You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing.
From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows.
Funny too how Epstein helped Krauss. That money wasn't from nothing, it was from someone disgusting helping another disgusting person, Krauss.
www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/
---Lawrence Krauss, a physicist who retired from Arizona State University, even continued defending Epstein after his 2008 conviction, telling the Daily Beast in 2011: “As a scientist I always judge things on empirical evidence and he always has women ages 19 to 23 around him, but I’ve never seen anything else, so as a scientist, my presumption is that whatever the problems were I would believe him over other people.” He added, “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey; I feel raised by it.”---
from: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/18/private-jets-parties-and-eugenics-jeffrey-epsteins-bizarre-world-of-scientists
The biggest population of Mormonism in the world?Absolutely he should do lecture to Utah's people
I ldon't always agree, but I respect Lawrence. This is another delightful piece of art by him.
I could listen to him talk/teach for hours on end. Brilliant human being. I'd love to spend some time in his brain.
":Brilliant human being. I'd love to spend some time in his brain." Are you aware there are numerous charges of sexual harassment against him and he was forced out of his teaching job as a result?
But, hey, if you wanna spend time with him, go ahead. Just don't come crying that you wren't warned when his hands wander all over your body.
@@Jim-mn7yq what evidence you have for that? I think you have mistaken him from a priest you know
@@Jim-mn7yq
Curations Required, please & Thank you.
And I mean honest to goodness documentation, nothing for made up. I would like the seal from the governor's office or whatever office this indiscretion went through still on the paperwork. I am not one to double down when I am wrong, in light of new information, I do my due diligence and when all is said and done if the facts point in a direction that I previously did not agree with, I have to change my mind at that point and agree with the factual information. So if you are right, I would love to know.. because I would rather be right than wrong.
@@supernaturalarch666 This is the third time I've put up a post in response to your request. And each time those posts disappear. I'll try one more time.
You might want to look at this: www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/university-finds-prominent-astrophysicist-lawrence-krauss-grabbed-woman-s-breast
Also, you can use your favorite search engine and find all kinds of articles about many women who have come forth with accusations against Krauss.
@@yumeriagirl1231 Here is an article which mentions the actions taken against Krauss by Arizona State University.
www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/university-finds-prominent-astrophysicist-lawrence-krauss-grabbed-woman-s-breast
Also, you can just go to any good search engine and search. There are many many women who have alleged Krauss acted "inappropriately".
Whether you find this compelling or not is up to you. But in my mind there's no question the guy's a creep and I wouldn't want any woman I cared for alone with this guy.
What a stellar talk. I wish I had half his oratorical skill.
Einstein discovered that the attraction between objects like planets and stars occurs because their mass curves the fabric of space and time. Key word “fabric”. Quantum mechanics has further shown that what we thought was empty space (fabric) isn’t empty, it has dark matter and dark energy. That fabric jitters and sub atomic particles appear and disappear all the time. Physicists are concluding it is possible for a universe to come into being seemingly from nothing. What I don’t understand is, the “nothing” within this universe isn’t really nothing, it’s the fabric of our space-time. And that isn’t “nothing” in an absolute sense - as in absolute zero, nothing, the absence of something. Seems all we really know is that within the boundaries of our universe, there really isn't "nothing". And It also seems we still don’t understand how it’s possible to get something from nothing?
Well, we don't have a "nothing" to examine, so it makes sense that we couldn't say something comes from nothing.
facebook.com/104824284746733/posts/112177164011445/?app=fbl😒
Yes, yet our universe coming from nothing does mean that the Big Bang was truly the start of the fabric of space-time. And before that there truly was nothing, no fabric of space time or existence of any dimension. Yet, that doesn’t seem to be intuitive or make much sense.
Man, I love youtube for content like this without it you would only have seen this if you were there or happend to find it somewhere but youtube makes increasing one's knowledge very easy. I have a grade 8 diploma and that's all everything I have learned has come off the internet and RUclips has helped me greatly in learning I didn't see the point of school God did it was all the answer I needed back then things have changed drastically.
"I didn't see the point of school God did it was all the answer"
Great, now tell me how creation really happened since God was not needed. This will be easy for you since you made that claim. Let's see how smart you really are. Hint, you are NOT, but give me a laugh nonetheless, you clown.
@@2fast2block Tthe only thing that has ever been created is by Mankinds hands.
Your question assumes that there is a creation and therefore is invalid.
Krauss is an incredible speaker. He really knows his stuff and holds your attention. Would loved to have had him as a professor.
Please please provide us with more videos. Mr Krauss is the best teacher in all the multi universe! May God, Allah, Moses, the universe etc. Bring nachas to mr. K.
If there is such a thing as a multiverses then one could be designed by God
@@gregsmith5134 a multiverse doesnt necessarilymean endless possibilitiesif those possibilitiesare illogical. It's like saying if a multiverse exists than a universe exists in which the multiverse doesnt exist.
An update: I'm not sure when exactly we learned this, so I don't know if it was before or after this talk, but apparently we aren't quite as much star dust as Krauss seems to indicate. The very early universe, for a brief time, had conditions that allowed the formation of helium and some other elements which exist in a ratio that we can apparently use to calculate the amount of matter in the universe. This video explains: ruclips.net/video/Kp_kqamkYpw/видео.html
I'm only half way through and already my mind is completely blown. I've learned stuff I'd never come across before and I've studied cosmology for years.
Fascinating, no wonder RD took him under his wing. What an amazing contribution to the world. Can't wait to read his books.
Yeah, you can't wait to read his books as you rub pleasuring yourself silly. It's what you sick losers do.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
From last few minutes of the talk, it raises a question - we are saying how future beings will be ignorant of things like Cosmic background or expanding universe which is crucial for explaining the mechanics of the universe. The same logic can be applied to us that some important piece of information/evidence exists no more today and we are framing the theory/story based on available data that may or may not be totally true/real.
I just finished reading his book , what an amazing book ,, awww,,
He is an human with real feelings
The way he took the names of Richard Feynman/Richard Dawkins and the one and only Christopher Hitchens in the book and of course during his lecture on you tube about the wonderful Carl Sagan and everything else ,,
My lottery of life is winning the lottery of having time and attention to read and hear them ,, thank you Lawrence 🙏
So you thank loser Krauss for making you a loser too. Amazing.
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God.
So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally.
Forget the accusations of sexual misconduct etc. this is an awe-inspiring talk and should wet the appetite of any person to develop an interest in scientific research
"The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time"
the fun part is they can't actually prove much of their claims on an observational, it is their version of a creation myth
Scientism ... we've heard it all before. If you can't bang on it with a hammer it doesn't exist. Incredible ignorance and prejudice. Dawkins is a nutter. What dark times we are in when people actually take him and his hatreds seriously.
That reminds me of a line by Sir Terry Pratchett about the odds of things happening. "Scientists have calculated that the chances of something so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten."
@@davidstokes5905 LOL@ "scientism". IT'S SCIENCE. When you can provide CREDIBLE EVIDENCE for the existence of any "god" let us know. Until then, it's all mythology and superstition.
Credible evidence of God is impossible imo...but even hypothetically i give u one...u still try for "eternity" to find the scientific reasons for that evidence (thing or phenomenon) to prove that its not an omnipotent being but just highly intelligent phenomenon or machine.... So there is no point in giving an evidence
I love this guy!
Greetings from Barcelona!
Que viva Barcelona coño!! Estuvimos en vuestras tierra en 04 y nos encanto! restaurantes, tapas, excelente vida en la noche, personas educadas amables, excelentes museos y El Corte Inglés.
Mi esposa y yo pensamos visitar otra vez, gracias, Cheers!🍻🫒🥖
This man knows how to incite love for science ;)
No. Wrong! He bastardizes science and uses his misstatements, misinterpretations, misapplications to get you and others to hate GOD. He is using you as his minion to make himself feel better about his rebellion against God. What are you going to do when you are tossed into hell with him. He cannot help you then. He will not want to help you because he won't be able to help himself. You'll be tormented and in anguish forever because you allowed him to deceive you and fool you into believing his lies. You can change today, but it's your choice. You have to make the conscious effort to choose to change!!!!! Real science, not this bastardized evolutionary crap, always agrees with and supports Scripture!!! That's why I love true, true, science!!!!!
@@castanheiro6170 clean the drool off your shirt.
like what （・・？
let's talk it over here …
↓
chat.whatsapp.com/LT8eYjMxtza7uZ9tnqgZkf
@@EnSabahNur-ir5mw our solar system is expanding because the sun is losing its strength in gravity. I am not against god by any means, but I am also not a believer, im what one might call a true agnostic
@@EnSabahNur-ir5mw Because the gravitational pull of the sun. Only the space in between the galaxies is expanding.
It depends on what you mean by special. We're not special in any philosophical, religious or metaphysical sense. But you can view life as everything is a miracle or that nothing is a miracle. And frankly I'd rather be an optimist because it's extraordinary that we are not special yet we can understand so much about the universe over the course of a very short time. To me that is exhilarating and almost spiritual akin to how Carl Sagan and Einstein viewed the universe.
I love videos like this. They make science, and genuinely important issues, even if you are not a scientist, accessible to the general population. I didn't understand some of what he said, i.e. the actual equations meant nothing to me lol, but overall, I got it :) I tend to keep videos where there's lots of info to take in in my 'Watch Later' list, so I can watch them more than once, if I ever need to refresh my memory :) Will probably watch this one again. These kind of videos are so important in this day and age, where you still have quite a lot of people in the world who are anti-science (and sadly, we are seeing a bit of a rise in anti-science sentiments ☹), or religious people who ask questions, questions that I have heard myself quite a lot in my time, like, "But how do they KNOW all this stuff? Where do they come up with the ages of things, timescales, distances etc? Science is just a bunch of guesses" etc. Also shout out to Christopher Hitchens, who recommended this talk in one of his videos- glad I searched for it :)
In which video did he talk about this please
Most exciting lecture I came acrass since long time. Brilliant! Fantastic, what Science has come to know and understand!
17,30 ia genius. Laurence Krauss I salute you.
Krauss you are a knowledgeable man. Not everyone will understand the depth of your knowledge. I appreciate that you spend your time educating people about science and rational thinking.
Existence is a patch of light between two eternities of darkness.
Bullshit. Existence comes for free
Eternity is impossible, biach
a dare anyone to give me a religious video that would give me a high like this on the wonders of the universe
+Ladyy Door www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
CRACKWHORE;
Donja THINK?! the Nobel Committee would be INTERESTED!! in Kruass answering humankind's
OLDEST QUESTION?!? THEY AREN'T!! THEY WON'T BE!!! IT'S UNADULTERATED SHIT!!!
I'll roll this one to you VERY SLOWLY: "Academic journal reviews" have NO OTHER FUNCTION
than to "review" GASPERS of breaking science, SUPPOSEDLY as Kruass claims to have advanced.
THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN NEAR Kruass' crockofshit. They'd be LAUGHED OUT OF PRINT!!!
MIT physicist Ian Hutchinson said to Kruass' face: "You're not describing a universe without god....
you're describing a universe without PHYSICS." BUT!!...
With 40" remaining in the debate Kruass' ONLY response was: "Nuh Uh"...a 2y/o's response!
"Climbing wall/dry-ice lagoon" ASU has SOME academic pretense...Kruass HAS TO walk
it all back in his idiot/ass "book".
"Narcan" is EXACTLY what you need...followed by it would appear, "Methadone".
Here's a long term therapy for you: Find ANYONE whom even ENTERTAINS Kruass'
"atheist creation myth" OTHER THAN ANOTHER "Scientific Atheist".
+Carl Arnold You're basing your argument on the opinions of a Professor of Philosophy not a Professor of Theoretical Physics.
David Albert's opinion is no more valid than any other intelligent person with a keen interest in the subject. But nether he - nor you - have any right to put his opinion on a par with Lawrence Krauss' opinion.
eddiegaltek don't tell me you didn't enjoy this ? xDD
+Ladyy Door That makes no sense. It's like you said: a dare anyone to give me a economy video that would give me a high like this on the wonders of the universe.
+Mario Cardona Not really, you see the economy actually exists, where as you god actually doesn't.
So, Lawrence Krauss is a flat-universer? :)
Bruhh
He's a dingbat thinking creation happened naturally.
@@2fast2block You're a dingbat if you think Mr. Magic Man created the universe and when asked where he came from, you say he always was. Sorry. You don't get to say he's an exception just because it's inconvenient for you. The same logic applies to everything period, and because I already know your response, I'll reply to that. If your God is not bound by logic and space/time, then how can you claim and assert he exists? You just admitted he's not bound by logic. So it all boils down to wishful thinking. So nice try. The null hypothesis or default position is to be skeptical of the God claim until there's extraordinary empirical evidence for its existence. End of story.
@@StaticBlaster "You're a dingbat if you think Mr. Magic Man created the universe"
I believe God created the universe and never said "Mr. Magic Man" did. But hey, slander away but it didn't go unnoticed what a clown you are.
"Sorry. You don't get to say he's an exception just because it's inconvenient for you."
Shove this up your behind and see if it reaches your head...
So in your way of foolish thinking, if a supernatural creator created the natural realm, then that supernatural creator who created the natural realm with its natural laws has then become also bound by those natural laws the supernatural creator created. So explain why a supernatural creator is also bound by the laws the supernatural creator created. Or, show how smart you are and just give your science for creation happening naturally and don't forget to give your science how the natural laws were created, too. If you want to act smart, it may be a good idea to actually show you are.
"The null hypothesis or default position is to be skeptical of the God claim until there's extraordinary empirical evidence for its existence. End of story."
Funny how you clowns who are a waste of life think you're so smart. It's hilarious.
Bozo, when you tell me how God is bound by the laws He created, also throw in how you got around these laws....
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
Make me laugh, clown, it's all you're good for.
@Baphomet the Sabbatic Goat "wow, to say all that, and call someone else a clown. You really are a deluded moron."
And your evidence to show my evidence is wrong....
(blank)
Yet, you being the waste of life you love to be has the gall to call me "a deluded moron."
I love crushing you clowns and this is nothing compared to when you're judged by your Maker because YOU chose to ignore the evidence.
Kinda makes one wonder how much we missed over the last few thousand years by not being able to observe out into the past as it drifts from our sight. Not to mention the stuff that is technologically outside of our vision in this moment. An amazing speech about amazing stuff, or should I say about nothing.
No, it was dingbat stuff for dingbats like you.
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
Learn some BASIC science or just keep on being delusional.
At 37:36: Krauss said "George Gamow" so quickly that you may have missed it. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Gamow
Wow i didnt know about this Scientist and a great one at that
Perhaps we think we know the whole story of the universe but a crucial chapter is missing due to the accelerated expansion of the universe or for some other reason that's not yet been discovered.
@Brad Watson The bible is BS. So Jesus can't possibly be coming back. They've been saying this sh** for centuries.
@Brad Watson God doesn't exist and there's no reason to reveal my identity on the internet. Those who do are morons.
@Brad Watson gibberish
This video was released almost 10 years ago but I still have to return to it every once in a while. ☺️
To laugh !!
It makes no sense to me
If someone can come from nothing by quantum fluctuations then isn't quantum fluctuation somthing...?
@Dianne Lo it very difficult when you had a stroke you can see the word in you head but thwy come out wrong. Nice TRATE you have pointing that out.. Do you have many friends
@Dianne Lo may be you like to correct my spelling mistakes
Of course you do. That's because what you want to believe about the cosmos doesn't line up with what you see and therefore you have to come back here to get all ginned up at the tit of evolution and atheism so you can re-convince yourself that you're not as stupid as your conscience tells you that you are.
"We will be lonely and ignorant, but dominant....."; brilliant! How many times have I watched this? Lost count!
"We live in a very special time. The only time we can observationally verify that we live in a very special time" -L. Krauss
Krauss is nothing special in any time. He's a fool.
Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life."
Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html
That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass.
ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html
Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity.
ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html
creation.com/laws-of-information-1
creation.com/laws-of-information-2
To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing".
But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then.
*Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.*
"A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space"
from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html
"Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."-
from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
"That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing."
from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5
And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning.
www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html
kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe
I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not.
From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand.
Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have.
ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html
Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things.
www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1
"One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began."
"The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem."
"Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!"
Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing
You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing.
From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows.
Funny too how Epstein helped Krauss. That money wasn't from nothing, it was from someone disgusting helping another disgusting person, Krauss.
www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/
---Lawrence Krauss, a physicist who retired from Arizona State University, even continued defending Epstein after his 2008 conviction, telling the Daily Beast in 2011: “As a scientist I always judge things on empirical evidence and he always has women ages 19 to 23 around him, but I’ve never seen anything else, so as a scientist, my presumption is that whatever the problems were I would believe him over other people.” He added, “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey; I feel raised by it.”---
from: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/18/private-jets-parties-and-eugenics-jeffrey-epsteins-bizarre-world-of-scientists
@@tonytimonis8732 😂😂 is that all you can do idiot, this krauss guy is a joke, what he says is complete nonsense, this " something from nothing " is just embarrassing and irrational, science is based on rationality, what Krauss says is irrational, he can't prove that something can come from nothing so he redefines the meaning of " nothingness ", he's a deceiver or magician that attracts naive and poor minded people like you.
I'll ask you this question : is the universe existence caused or uncaused ?
@@damxcv you talking to yourself again 🤦♂️
@@tonytimonis8732 😂😂 ok I'll ask nicely : do you want to enter in the conversation ?
If you don't want to then say " no"
@@2fast2block the same copy pasta crap all the time
Stop it
At 18:15 my eyes started to tear up, this is beautiful even the 20th time watching it.
Simply wonderful. Lawrence a genius. Richard a bright light in the night. Thank you guys. You are amazing
@Sheerluck Holmes Mr, this is the reality, my friend. You can like it or not. But I'm so proud to be a human being when I see people who dedicate their entire life to study the wonderful universe in wich we live in.
Simply stupid. Both of them. Claiming creation already there is now nothing and it made more creation. You are a clown too.
"Awareness is known by awareness alone," is the sole irreducible axiom of reality. To put forth a syllable to refute it is to concede..
Yes but don't forget your heart
This conference was amazing
Nothing but a big pile of shit!!!!!
Anybody know when Lawrence Krauss asked a question from the audience to Richard a few years ago..? Dawkins said that, that is how they met, and the question he asked was a tough one. So, anyone knows when this was, please share.
If this is true, I'd also like to know!
+Sachin Rao Type Neil tyson rebukes dawkins. He asks more or less the same question with krauss. Unfortunately we dont have a video with krauss asking him.
Ahhh, I never get tired of watching this video. I maybe my fourth or fifth time now and I enjoy it now as more (or more so) than the first time I saw it.
OK, now you know something? Then do tell how creation came from nothing.
@@2fast2block Did you watch the video? Did you understand the content? The phrase "how creation came from nothing" is a question without context. What do you mean by "creation" and what does "nothing" mean. Consider "nothing" is the absence of everything, "nothing" does not have dimension or content. Is this what you mean by "nothing"? When space/time begins to exist is that "creation"?
Please stop with the bumper sticker phrases and ask questions with context.
@@areliablesource2848 "What do you mean by "creation""
I mean a slice of ham, you dingbat. You clown asking what creation means. And, you're serious. This is the crap brain you got with Krauss.
But wait, if that wasn't silly enough, hold on, another question...
"and what does "nothing" mean."
Have you ever heard the word "dictionary"? Have you made it past grade school yet?
"Consider "nothing" is the absence of everything"
Really, consider? Well, so it's somehow really not, not a single thing?
"When space/time begins to exist is that "creation"?"
What's next, does 2 + 2 = 4?
@@2fast2block ... and yet you don't have an answer. Just for clarification; "nothing" is the absence of everything. Space, time, energy and matter; all gone, nothing. Can you come to grips what "nothing" means? You can't describe nothing because once you start naming what it is then it is no longer "nothing". Now tell me what is "creation". Is it when there is energy in the "nothing"? Or, are you hung up on the "creation" story in that cave man fairy tail called the bible?
@@areliablesource2848 looky here, after all I wrote your worthless life then ask....
"Can you come to grips what "nothing" means?"
Can you read? Can you think?
Then, you clown, hits some kind of revelation....
"You can't describe nothing because once you start naming what it is then it is no longer "nothing"."
Really? Can you tell Krauss that?
"Or, are you hung up on the "creation" story in that cave man fairy tail called the bible?"
Bozo, last I checked, the bible starts with a supernatural creation, not a natural one.
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
But to you the bible is a ""creation" story in that cave man fairy tail called the bible?"
Great, so you then know the real way creation happened that got around those laws. Are you done getting your orgasms with your useless questions because you can't read? Likely not, you dingbat. But continue to make me laugh, clown, and tell me how you got around those laws.
Do I understand even 1% of this? No. But Lawrence Krauss brings his subject alive and makes it fascinating. I also love his sharp, self deprecating wit. Excellent. Thanks.
The greatest talk ever,... so far.
i would side with some religious people that comment on here to protect their beliefs.but then i remember that for hundreds of years they were burning people on a stake for mentioning that the earth spins around the sun and that we are not the center of the universe, of course opposing their belief that a virgin gave birth to a child that was given the seed from the creator of everything and still ended up getting brutally murdered. OH I ALMOST FORGOT the creator of everything made immortal people, planted a tree with a serpent and delicious fruit, gave them traits that will disobey him and banishes them and curses them with mortality after they do so.
Yo dawg people will kill each other en masse in the name of Communism. People don't need to be religious to enact horrific deeds. As to the ridiculous fables of yore, when people know more we will seem just as goofy with what we envisioned as being true.
"I would side with some people now, but some different people hundreds of years ago were bad, so I won't"
@@bencoates5587 Classic!
@@bencoates5587 Cheers.
@@RonnieLimestone Communism has more in common with religion than you think, dawg. There's a reason why theocracy is called theocracy.
I like your style Richard. You educate me well with your knowledge. Thank you
No, he feeds you carbage. Start thinking for a change.
Richard Dawkins teaches the universe came from "literally nothing."
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space, and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We can't get anything from "literally nothing." We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God.
@@2fast2block "Real science says nothing does nothing. " A scientist just presented how something can come from nothing.
@@wolfgangouille no, loser gave it and loser you can't get around the science I gave either. All a loser has to do is say blah-blah and then you'll say it was a "scientist" even when they are braindead and gave NO science to make their point. You're a loser just as they are.
The real problem is that no one seems able to agree on what "Nothing" actually IS. Yet it's obviously important, because a lot of people make a big deal about Nothing. Freddie Mercury said "Nothing really matters" towards the end of an iconic Queen song. Even the sitcom "Seinfeld" was described as the show about Nothing.
Because "Nothing" really matters?
I left Islam when I read the Qur'an, Sunnah, Islamic law and the biography of Muhammad
👍🏽👍🏽i hope some of my frnds will understand that you've understand!
Bro you have chosen to go to hell becouse you believe lawrens kraus hawking dawkins please tell me where hawking now is he in paradise in his grave or hell in his grave
@@ANUJ.7if they believe what you believe they will go to hell but if you believe in what they your frienda believe you will go to paradise insha-allah i pray to God to help you get his massege😊
What do you got
When listening to the various explanations for a universe from nothing, a critical thinker will observe that there must be special requirements for this “nothing.” These include:
empty space
> a law of quantum gravity
> some sort of “laws of nature”
> variable of time so that the equations of quantum mechanics can be meaningful
> a “false vacuum” and
a multiverse from which our universe can expand from some other empty space containing zero energy and mass.
Obviously (at least to a physicist) none of these things qualify as “absolutely nothing at all.” Yet this is precisely what is needed if Krauss’s argument is to deliver what many atheists think it promises.
A critical thinker doesn't necessarily know what they're talking about, and doesn't sound smarter when he, by fiat, declares that there MUST be this list of properties of a thing we don't know exists because he is uncomfortable.
I love science, it really destroyed my faith in God!
Cool. Not mine.
"The first gulp of the glass of the natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you" - Werner Heisenberg
@@ResurrectingJiriki There's the uncertainty principle for you.
@@panjandrum.conundrum How's that the uncertainty principle?
Nice approach non the less, but the quote would beter be interpreted as what it describes. When you start looking, it looks like there is no need or proof for a god. When you keep looking and get a bigger picture and understanding, the obviousness of a 'greater than thou mortals' conscience becomes hard to miss/apparent.
FYI, Freemasons can only join said club when they acknowledge a 'supreme being'.
Masons obviously are also a club that's very serious about science.
Science in itself was originally created to look past the simple, naïve and limited perception of the human mind, with the goal to find, understand and behold the glory of God. People were like that back then.
Now all people think science is about it seems, is disproving a god or superior being, conscience.
I think Krauss seems amazingly smart and at the same time IS ridiculously logically inconsistent. And I find him very creepy, not sure why though...
I love science too because it increases and reconfirms my faith in God! For the believer there is plenty of evidence. For the skeptic no amount of evidence is sufficient.
When you have nothing, You always get something. That’s beautiful
What if someone told you it's not?
And that once we get to the point where we're tired of being led by the carrot to eat the carrot and search for a new one repeatedly for the rest of our days, that it won't feel satisfying and beautiful?
All life gives us is essentially drugs to be addicted to. Addicted to attention, addicted to money, addicted to video games, and addicted to well, searching. God is steady and we all know deep down that the idea of loving relativity and mystery and the "undefined" is something we were taught to do, not created to do.
Praying may God lead you to His merciful love 🙏
We are stardust.
We are golden.
And we've got to get it back
to the garden. ~ Joni Mitchell.
We are stardust? And do tell how the stars and universe got there to make us us. You fools keep leaving that part out because you don't think.
facebook.com/104824284746733/posts/112177164011445/?app=fbl😒
Oh man I wish he did an 8 hour long talk where he goes off to all the directions and stories he wants to.
I think he does that in his book "A universe from nothing". Im gonna check it out
He hired folks from the street to laugh at his wry jokes? 🤣
wow, I was expecting the comment section to be grateful for this video and the amazing insights. Instead it's full of people who actually think they're smarter than these great intellectuals.
What great intellectuals?
The Qantas must be putting their atta boys in the wrong slit. But we know their there.
intelectuals?? Krauss is just a bitter atheist!
apparently he grew bored of mere science and decided to start fooling other people who has also never seen GOD......
@@badjohnnyisbad, so by answering my comment you admit also to be fooled by Krauss?...
you never seen me, yet you can't deny I exist....hence this answer.
it's the same logic, so, unless you can definitely prove that God does not exist....keep quiet 😂 🤣 😁...
@@badjohnnyisbad, well ain't that just convenient? hey everybody, JB here can "dismiss" God!!....
ain't JB something to behold!!
i bet there's an angel knocking on God's room;
"Sr, master my lord, something terrible has just happened, someone who goes by JB sr..... he.... he's dismiss you lord!!....
and he said.... he also said you don't exist!!...
-no but seriously, for a simple human, a pile of flesh held together by some weak pitiful bones, to say God does not exist....!!?
that's something that cracks me up....(but no, I am not lmao....)
Dr. Hugh Ross should be part of this conversation... He's a brilliant scientist. He's been studying astrophysics from the age of 7.
A great lecture. "the atoms on your left hand come a different galaxy than the atoms on your right hand."
I will buy my son a telescope and tell him this.
He will respect and adore you for it. And when he looks up there, ensure you tell him “as above, so below”.
Meaning: he will find no evil out there therefore it does not exist.
@@IAmNoOne281
No!
No buybull bullshit!
@@WilbertLek what?
The very first ad before this amazing video was about bible study! Jajajajajajajaja
Well, the bible starts out with God's supernatural creation. Do you know how creation happened another way?
facebook.com/104824284746733/posts/112177164011445/?app=fbl😒
@@2fast2block you get about a bit dude. There's a way more plausible explanation, you just deny it. To think an immortal sky daddy, poofed into existence, somehow, then poofed everything what into existence is so ludicrous it doesn't warrant any thought. Like children thinking magic bunny rabbits crap out chocolate eggs at Easter, you sir, have been duped
@@2fast2block yeah God farted and he ignited gas and Boom created this stupid universe and earth and yout miserable ass.
@@poozer1986 me previously...Well, the bible starts out with God's supernatural creation. Do you know how creation happened another way?
B-itch, here's some BASIC science you never learned, obviously. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We KNOW this. So clown, give me a laugh how you got around this.
Thanks Krauss..awesome lecture as always
facebook.com/104824284746733/posts/112177164011445/?app=fbl😒😔😔
Lots of fascinating stuff here. I recently bought Dr. Krauss's book and I'm excited to read it.
One of the best explanations about the origin of the universe I have ever seen
It's wrong. This is Disney Channel for adults.
If quantum fluctuations came before - and caused - the Big Bang, where do the quantum fluctuations come from? What caused the quantum fluctuations?
@@thecrownjewel2759 *WHAT* is an "intrinsic property of nature" ? You're left with Infinite regression. Where did nature come from? What brought about the intrinsic properties of nature? (I don't believe in any "God", personal or otherwise, by the way).
This was an amazing video. Thankyou!
It was interesting but I don't get it... Basically he said.. Religus people ask him all the time how can something come from nothing
He said if you zero energy. By quantum fluctuations you can get something.... Well quantum fluctuations are somthing... So there ecan never be nothing...
@@vashnanerada8757 Krauss never cared what science proves. He cares about lying to his fellow losers.
Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We KNOW these laws. We have NO doubts about them. We also KNOW that the laws of nature can't come about without a Lawgiver, God.
So if you want to pretend to be smart, please give me the laugh by giving your science how creation really happened by natural means. Also, throw in how we got the laws of nature, naturally.
57:00 " if a baby universe where to form, from the inside it would look like it is expanding but from the outside is would look like a black hole."
So dark energy is gravity seen from an other angle.
So every black hole is a white hole and a universe depending on where you look at it.
So quantum fluctuations also fluctuate at large scale, generating energy differential, wich generates a flow of matter (we call gravity) into streams (filaments) and pooling into clumps growing into black hole.
(Quantum gravity for you)
Other visualisation: Cymatics.
The area that have large amplitude "repelles" the sand that gathers in smaller amplitude area.
The vibration acts like a conveyor belt of matter. The vibration acts like gravity.
It is not that spacetime is bent by matter. Spacetime vibrates and the vibration is crushed by matter. But like a battle rope, the vibration is pushing matter.
It looks like the pilot wave theory.
Let me know what you think.
Enjoy
Edit: if at the center of a hypothetical hollow planet we experience zero gravity, then the same applies at the center of a black hole. So zero gravity at the center of a black hole.
Spacetime being stretched looks like expansion from the point of view of the singularity.
A white hole would look like a big bang.
Such a smart man.
Krauss and Dawkins are fools.
Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life."
Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html
That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass.
ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html
Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity.
ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html
creation.com/laws-of-information-1
creation.com/laws-of-information-2
To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing".
But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then.
*Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.*
"A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space"
from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html
"Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."-
from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
"That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing."
from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5
And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning.
www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html
kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe
I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not.
From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand.
Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have.
ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html
Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things.
www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1
"One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began."
"The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem."
"Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!"
Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing
You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing.
From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows.
Funny too how Epstein helped Krauss. That money wasn't from nothing, it was from someone disgusting helping another disgusting person, Krauss.
www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/
---Lawrence Krauss, a physicist who retired from Arizona State University, even continued defending Epstein after his 2008 conviction, telling the Daily Beast in 2011: “As a scientist I always judge things on empirical evidence and he always has women ages 19 to 23 around him, but I’ve never seen anything else, so as a scientist, my presumption is that whatever the problems were I would believe him over other people.” He added, “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey; I feel raised by it.”---
from: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/18/private-jets-parties-and-eugenics-jeffrey-epsteins-bizarre-world-of-scientists
@@2fast2block shut up donkey 🤦♂️
Amazing talk sir. You made me think about taking up astronomy after my engg graduation. I'll never stop learning. I'll study all sciences or at least most of it though in brief or in detail.
You're a dumbass now to believe Krauss. You're rather hopeless no matter what you take.
Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life."
Just past 18:00 here: ruclips.net/video/7ImvlS8PLIo/видео.html
That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass.
ruclips.net/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/r4sP1E1Jd_Y/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Ymjlrw6GmKU/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/L0-hgSjnomA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/5AXkrc2OSs4/видео.html
Life takes information to proceed on. But to atheists/agnostics, chaos through time gave us information. Although it's even hard to write such a ridiculous statement, they believe it. All one can do is laugh at such stupidity.
ruclips.net/video/aA-FcnLsF1g/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/7c9PaZzsqEg/видео.html
creation.com/laws-of-information-1
creation.com/laws-of-information-2
To this dumbass, it's ok to say that space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, ALL being there ALREADY with NO explanation of how, is OK to call "nothing". There, by that alone, Krauss excused himself of all of that. You simply come up with a childish snot-nosed brat excuse to call it "nothing".
But it gets worse, space, matter, time, and the laws of physics, called nothing, created more space, matter, and time. The laws of physics were broken to create more space, matter, and time. Keep in mind (for those that have a working mind), that this "nothing" was eternal, and just by chance about 13 billion years ago according to Krauss, then did its magic. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics were asleep then.
*Krauss' attempt to dispell the need of God, just confirms the need.*
"A vacuum, to us, is a space with no matter in it. As a practical matter though, it's really a space with very little matter in it. You might already know that it's REALLY hard to get all the matter out of any space"
from: education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html
"Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff."-
from: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
"That makes Matter = Energy; Energy = Space; Space = Time. Therefore matter, energy, space and time are all interchangeable characteristics, which implies strongly that they are all forms of one thing."
from: medium.com/@alasdairf/are-matter-energy-time-space-all-interchangeable-e2dbf7d411e5
And this "nothing" from chaos gave us the fine-tuning.
www.inplainsite.org/html/anthropic_principles.html
kgov.com/fine-tuning-of-the-universe
I like starting from the beginning because it shows how we got something to begin with. Not just that, it shows from the start who gave up their logic and who did not.
From all we know, creation HAD to be a supernatural event. The first logical and honest step is to admit that. The second step is to seek who or what did the supernatural event and the proof for that. Fools jump to 'who created god', 'god of the gaps', 'science does not deal with supernatural' and whatever excuse they can use to prevent them from seeing the truth. All they can do is fart smoke screens to avoid the issue at hand.
Those that deny it was a supernatural event, such a Krauss, Dawkins and a whole host of other fools, live in their fairytale of just making things up with nothing to back them. They say things so outrageous that they ask you to give up your common sense for science. Krauss and Dawkins go back and forth calling it "literally nothing" knowing it is something, and even their something can't produce what we have.
ruclips.net/video/UT3dfPOdAYU/видео.html
Krauss admits he does not give a damn what nothing means and he then says he wants to be honest with his readers. He is full of doublespeak. He is WRONG and all he has is pride to continue saying such stupid things.
www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1
"One unsolved mystery is why there is an excess of mater in our universe; this is the Matter/antimatter problem. Why is the universe only made of matter? Matter/antimatter particles annihilate each other to produce radiation. Radiation coverts to equal amounts of matter and anti matter. Krauss says that the CMB suggests the photon-to-proton ratio was a billion to one. He says that by ‘plausible quantum processes’ the universe started out with 1 part per billion more matter than antimatter. Most of the matter and antimatter combined to make photons. Later he admits we still don’t really know how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter began."
"The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is 10 to the 120 times greater than that observed. This is a long-standing unsolved problem."
"Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with non-zero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with non-zero energy is something!"
Quotes from another review of Krauss' book here: creation.com/review-krauss-universe-from-nothing
You can read Hawking, Krauss, Dawkins, and others who praise their gravity but they just made it up and have no idea where it could have come from. And the list goes on. All they have comes down to nothing.
From the start, fools gave up their logic and that does not bother them. When it does not bother someone from the start, they continue giving up their logic with what follows.
@@2fast2block If anything, science is so fascinating that it should enhance peoples believe in God. Krauss is just another egomaniac.
@@2fast2block As Billy Preston sang "Nothing from nothing gives nothing, you gotta have something ... "
@@psilvakimo Love it!
When Krauss heard that song he must have thought, "Well, I'll just change the meaning of nothing this way I can sell a book to dumbasses called A Universe From Nothing."
I'm so glad I finally watched this lecture. So interesting and fascinating. Still, correct me if I'm wrong, does he really equivocate the word nothing? Because when I think of nothing it's absence of time, space and matter and even the laws of nature, but he defines it as this vacuum. Can someone explain it if he or she knows?
www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/01/31/the-four-scientific-meanings-of-nothing/#24e2d8c51a5f
@Hitogokochi it's not that no one knows, but many sometimes play ignorant to avoid certain facts.
@Hitogokochi I'm familiar with it. I heard this from InspiringPhilosophy.
@Hitogokochi great. Thanks.
I do have a question for you: if Christianity were true would you become a Christian?
I think he said: Vacuum energy is [positive] and equal to gravity [negative] when there was a singularity. Gravity is negative for a split second at the start of the universe.
How could this have so many dislikes? An absolutely wonderful talk!
I disliked it. I see the insanity of these clowns. Oh, but wait, you are sure of yourself. Do tell how creation happened naturally and include evidence.
@@2fast2block Nobody knows this with any justification or evidence, and certainly not theists. There is no evidence that G-d exists, let along that G-d created anything. You can more easily - and more probably - just say the universe created itself. At least there is evidence here of existence, though of course not of any role as prime mover. Not that the real question of first cause can really be answered anyway.
It's a cliche that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but there are actually many times when this is not necessarily true. In the case of G-d, you might think there would be at least some evidence, but there isn't any at all. Hard to accept maybe, but facts are facts. Meanwhile, great mysteries remain, at least for those with enough courage to face them.
I actually am a theist btw, but these atheists have the advantage of being just about the only actually smart, educated, and most importantly honest people discussing these matters.
@@adreaminxy blah, blah, then, "and more probably - just say the universe created itself."
That is impossible and you gave NO evidence how that can be. You just listened to dingbat Krauss and you can't explain a natural creation.
"In the case of G-d, you might think there would be at least some evidence, but there isn't any at all."
Punk, let me teach you some basic science since it is clear you don't know it. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it.
We KNOW those laws, punk. Now, stop being a wuss pretending we don't know and get around those laws. It should be easy for you since you have on your side, "these atheists have the advantage of being just about the only actually smart, educated, and most importantly honest people discussing these matters."
Again, wimp, do tell how creation happened naturally and include evidence.
How many times will you reply and not give evidence? You must love being the clown you've always been.
@@2fast2block You are very sure of your own self for someone who is only parroting a couple of talking points that are, whether you can recognize it or not, rather pitiful non sequiturs. All you have there is wishful thinking and assertions without evidence. Again, it is on the surface more probable that the universe created itself since there is absolutely no evidence of G-d or anything supernatural. But I'm not the one claiming to know something that nobody does. That's you, apparently.
Speaking of wimps, who here is desperate for a celestial daddy figure to ease the fear and uncertainty of living in what is by all appearances - at least according to all the actual evidence - an indifferent universe? You are of course free to believe whatever you want, as I do, but you have no actual evidence, no matter what your limited education has led you to imagine about the laws of thermodynamics which are of course only known insofar as they have been empirically verified.
@@adreaminxy "All you have there is wishful thinking and assertions without evidence."
Says the clown who can't get around what science I gave.
"But I'm not the one claiming to know something that nobody does. That's you, apparently."
You have, dingbat, "All you have there is wishful thinking and assertions without evidence."
Clown, we know those laws and lying and being a wimp does not make them go away.
"but you have no actual evidence, no matter what your limited education has led you to imagine about the laws of thermodynamics which are of course only known insofar as they have been empirically verified."
Is there a reason you want to go on living being the waste of life and resources you are? We know that science and you can't get around them, bozo. Stop pretending to be smart when you are the exact opposite. Still, keep on embarrassing yourself, I don't care about you if you don't.
His wife reminded him that she is the center of the universe everyday lol
I am a Christian man who also loves science - I like to listen to gentlemen like Mr. Krauss and even Dawkins. I feel it is important to seek other points of view without painting them into a dogmatic corner as they often tend to do with those of us who believe the universe is created. I have pulled a few quotes that struck me as an example - along with a few a follow-up notes. If anyone is interested it would be great to correspond - not demean one another but to engage in a spirited exchange of ideas.
"Fairy tales that are made up, um, in most religious, um, situations"
- I realize this is a common characteristic made against the Bible by scientists to reject a creation based existence - but the reality is there are many scientists who believe in the God of the Bible - but this blanket statement is simply not true.
"Excitement of learning about the universe and that again is so different than the sterile aspect of religion which excitement is apparently knowing everything although really knowing nothing"
- I don't think I know everything, not even close, in fact the more I know the more I realize I don't know. What I do have is a guidebook to dive into, to get a small glimpse as it relates to the majesty of my creator.
"What you take from it depends on your religious and metaphysical beliefs, but whatever you think the Big Bang happened"
- so here Mr. Krauss sites a beginning, a starting point labeled the big bang - Wouldn't one need to then surmise the cause of such an event - a Big Banger? My counterpart may ask then who created God. But the God of the Bible is the cause first cause, the Logos, He is eternal and outside of time and space as we know it - God has no beginning and no end.
"Richard wrote a great book called, arr, I, oh, what's it called? Are ancestors? What's it called (asking Richard) ancestor's tale, yes, I wanted to make sure I got that right"
- Sorry, I just thought this was humorous - a great book, but what's the title?
"you are all stardust, you couldn't be here if stars hadn't exploded, cuz 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 only way they can 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"
- This touches on so many topics that are debatable but Mr. Krauss has now introduced abiogenesis, which is life from non-life. As one example of how modern science is pointing out (Dr. Douglas Axe) the astronomically high degree of CHANCE it would take to form just a single protein molecule of 150 amino acids (small as protein molecules go) would be 10 to the 77 power!
Sorry I cannot finish my response as my lunch break is over - I work with an outstanding group of people at the Hadron Collider
facility.
@Ψ My friend, it's because the scientific community is so entrenched in the denial of a creator or a mind that it will continue to go ignored - but not for long as real fact-based studies such as Dr. Axe has done will rise to the surface and will not be able to be ignored for much longer. As we can continue study the universe including the complexity life - I have no doubt it will further to point to a Mind.
But please consider that you will be dead for a very long time - not for me but for your sake please ask God to reveal himself to you - in your own private time - what harm will that have?
"so here Mr. Krauss sites a beginning, a starting point labeled the big bang - Wouldn't one need to then surmise the cause of such an event - a Big Banger? My counterpart may ask then who created God. But the God of the Bible is the cause first cause, the Logos, He is eternal and outside of time and space as we know it - God has no beginning and no end."
How can you have watched this. The entire talk, everything that was said, even the title of the video, and not have gotten what it's all about. He's lecturing on one thing. The universe can come from nothing. Everything we have observed shows us that the universe we live in is one where it's not just possible, but likely to have come from absolutely nothing. There is no need for a god in this equation. Everything we see and learn leads us to there being no need for a "Big Banger". You completely missed the point of this lecture.
That's really interesting about virtual particles, but I agree with some of the comments in that empty space is not the same as nothing. Nothing would mean not empty space, but no space. How can there be a quantum fluctuation if there is no space? Where did space come from?
Indeed. His idea presupposes a parent system likewise governed by physical laws, from which our universe spawned into temporary existence. I think it does not really address the origin question (often filled by gods) at all. The whole business of existence and non-existence has to be among the weirdest realms of thought I have encountered in my life. I hope to do a video on that some time.
Yeah I agree. I can't even imagine what it would be like to have no space or no time.
I think it addresses the origin question quite well. No one believes in a literal philosophical nothing. Even the religious believe there was God. But the laws of physics could define the role of God. The fundamental laws of physics could be infinite and eternal and the reason behind everything therefore why not just describe that as God?
I would argue that the question of why there is something rather than nothing does not make any sense..
The reason being is that the answer is so counter intuitive and beyond any human logic that it dos’nt make any sense to us, it is just abstract gobbledegook..
@@neosodon9895 But we can't know wether nothingness is possible or not. If non extistence is possible then then the Universe had obviously have to come into existence. I am okay with the big crunch cycles happening within our existence but this doesn't explain 'existence'
The absence of time,matter,energy and gravity is NOT nothing, as postulated by Krauss. Before those there were quantum fluctuatuations,SOME LAWS of PHYSICS, INFORMATION-DATA. You can not avoid GOD, the Creator. I am a deist, not a Christian. Tom Jefferson and Ben Franklin are among my heros.I WOULD LOVE TO SEE A DEBATE BETWEEN KRAUSS AND HUGH ROSS!!!
"Forget Jesus, you wouldn't be here without stardust" 😂😂😂😂
Dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return.
And who was the creator of the stardust and the Atoms that we are made up of ? 😎🤗
@@Chris-be5tv and who was the creator of God??? 😉
@@christopherharper6229 people allways asking who created God , God was not created , God has allways been and allways will be, Not a physical being but a super natural force that humanity has given a name too. God is the Universe.
@@Chris-be5tv 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤣🤣🤣🤣
Great video, first watched it years later and still worth hearing again. The jabs at religion are unnecessary. The lecture and science are interesting enough without them, and will keep me from recommending this video to some of my friends.
Agreed. :/
I don't think so, a majority of the people on earth today are still religious, even tho we have the knowledge to disprove them, so when he actually talks about something that disprove the ideas of religion, there is nothing wrong with taking 10s to mention it and explain it.
Throwing off childish things is necessary to grow.
55:12 “I pleaded with her to leave it in!”
Yeah, I wonder how many missed the double entendre in that sentence.
Our first daughter is called Nova because of this video.
I love this man, lol!!! His jacket is slightly to large but it doesn't matter in the the face of such brilliance
That talk was amazing
Not convincing though...can u explain what nothingness actually is??
@@wattt7467 Go read your bible dude
9 out of 10 scientists mention Einstein and Newton.After ww1, there was a scientist who spoke all Europian languages fluently and brought scientists that where divided in 2 groups together. I was loved by all scientists and was a mentor to Einstein. Einstein adore him and look up to him. Did experiments together and Einstein stayed at his place (house) many times. He had a theory called now relativity theory before Einstein. He was very humble at dare not to publish it so close after the war. His name Lorentz.
Also Newton got his laws from Christiaan Huygens. But those scientists are from small countries and not famous and (anglo), so are ignored. Scientists nowadays are well aducated Parrots.
facebook.com/104824284746733/posts/112177164011445/?app=fbl😒
Seriously
Any proofs
"The universe is big, and rare events happen all the time including life and that does not mean its special."