'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 окт 2009
- Lawrence Krauss gives a talk on our current picture of the universe, how it will end, and how it could have come from nothing. Krauss is the author of many bestselling books on Physics and Cosmology, including "The Physics of Star Trek."
Books by Lawrence Krauss:
www.amazon.com/Lawrence-M.-Kra...
Download Quicktime version
Small: c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.racksp...
720p HD: c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.racksp...
The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
richarddawkinsfoundation.org
Atheist Alliance International
atheistalliance.org
Produced by the Richard Dawkins Foundation and R. Elisabeth Cornwell
Filmed & edited by Josh Timonen 
Наука
![SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YUe0_4rdj0U/mqdefault.jpg)
![SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12](/img/tr.png)
"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.
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 🎉
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 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
"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.
This is f***** crazy😮😮. Insane. To be able to explain us these complex topics in this much simpler language is ART.
"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?
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 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.
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...
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.
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
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)
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!🍻🫒🥖
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.
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
11 years later recommend lol.
Why do you hate an entire group of human beings? Do you also hate other groups of human beings as well?
Its nice to look up what people who comment do on youtube to profile them. Like this serbian gamer and this us golf amateur...
@Vasian Vasianich Yeah it makes complete sense to hate people you do not know.. Yet you sound like such a nice person
@@zebbanister2348 I do not think he hates Jews. He probably means that he hates the present politics of the state of Israel. Which is not difficult.
It's still true today!
"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.
Once I got over his collar being asymmetrical, this was thoroughly insightful, informative, and humorous.
lol
Ah, you suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder, or as we like to call it, the oc disorder.
Liam Anderson
Hahaha
Love the bloke, but always think of him as the"Crappy Jacket Man".
🤣yep!
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.
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.
Exciting. Enlightening. Very well spoken and passion and truth are found here.
Lectures like this need to be shown to schoolchildren across the world, I can't think of a greater motivator to get involved in science than the opportunity to solve these compelling mysteries of our universe.
lol, all our kids can become "informed idiots?, Yay, it would be really sad if children automatically accepted everything he said as reality and didn't choose to use their own ability to apply logic to a problem.
We need to teach Children Critical thinking
@@quasimobius if you can impart religious studies,why not atheism,even if they accept it thinking uncritically,it would be better to generate a population of ethical atheists,
Rising religious people is already becoming a problem and challenge,to counter that we have to do it,
I really appreciate china,for what they r doing to students,keeping away from religious idiocity
Excellent lecture by a very good speaker. Very witty and entertaining.
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.
Lots of fascinating stuff here. I recently bought Dr. Krauss's book and I'm excited to read it.
What a stellar talk. I wish I had half his oratorical skill.
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.
17,30 ia genius. Laurence Krauss I salute you.
"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 ?
@@Radozdam 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
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!
"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
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.
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.
"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 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤣🤣🤣🤣
Most exciting lecture I came acrass since long time. Brilliant! Fantastic, what Science has come to know and understand!
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.
"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
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.
I'm so in awe of intellect such as this that is so very beyond my comprehension I am literally in tears.
When you're done crying, do explain how creation happened naturally from nothing. Since you think Krauss is smart at that, this should be easy for you.
@@2fast2block 🤦🏼♂️
@@poozer1986 take a rest. That attention to detail must have taken a lot of effort for you.
@@2fast2block just more embarrassment on my part, concerning you. You pop up so often, and tend to delete lots of your comments, because literally everyone you come across, thinks you're an ignoramus. You do absolutely nothing to help yourself.
@@poozer1986 me previously...do explain how creation happened naturally from nothing.
And this is what your evidence is how creation happened naturally from nothing...
"just more embarrassment on my part, concerning you. You pop up so often, and tend to delete lots of your comments, because literally everyone you come across, thinks you're an ignoramus. You do absolutely nothing to help yourself."
And let me guess, you thought of all that 'evidence' all by your empty self.
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
Krauss is an incredible speaker. He really knows his stuff and holds your attention. Would loved to have had him as a professor.
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
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.
July 2020. Still amazing
This conference was amazing
Nothing but a big pile of shit!!!!!
I cant understand how people are satisfied with "God" being the answer to all these big questions. Look where science has gotten us, do you not want to go further? The progress of human understanding is what I love about science and one of my personal goals in life.
+Marius “Mani” Nilsen Everything in the universe occurs according to the laws of physics. For example, the gravitational pull between atoms in a dust cloud create enough heat to start fusion; the pressure created by fusion pushes back against gravity to create a stable star. If we look at the rest of the universe; galaxies, black holes etc we see that they too are organized by the physical laws. If we look everywhere on earth the same statement holds as well.... With that said, it is my understanding that Christianity is based on the concept that God gave the physical laws that uphold all things; he created this universe by giving specific laws so that the universe organized itself a particular way(for discovery); hence why it is called intelligent design... Everything that science has discovered would thus support ID in every detail... With this thinking, understanding that all of science is based on the physical laws, we can conclude that the limitations of science are only being able to discover that which supports this ID. Thanks for reading
What big questions? Science cannot prove of God's in-existence, you guys really believe we and this whole universe just came into existence out of nothing?
Yup. We don't have to prove that God doesn't exist. It's like if I asked you (with all my respect to religions) to prove to me that Unicorns doesn't exist. You can't.
What's arrogant is not a religion claiming that the universe was created for us, but athiests claiming they're certain that God does not exist, when they don't even know what energy really is. Fools
Mean Max I'd never say god doesn't exist. But since I have no evidence of his reallity, I don't see why I should *believe* in his existence. And I can't see what energy has to do with all of it.
A great video. Great explanation.
Really? It is the same as in his book: "On the Origin of Everything" - and here is the commentary in New York Times:
www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=0
I ldon't always agree, but I respect Lawrence. This is another delightful piece of art by him.
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.
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?
Brilliant!
Our first daughter is called Nova because of this video.
Existence is a patch of light between two eternities of darkness.
Bullshit. Existence comes for free
Eternity is impossible, biach
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
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
Krauss and Dawkins , right or wrong do give me faith in humanity.
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.
This was great
Great video and really deep and inspiring.
It's "really deep" in crap is what I got out of it. Oh, but do tell how creation can come from nothing.
@@2fast2block Well it "hit" us differently.
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.
Thanks Krauss..awesome lecture as always
facebook.com/104824284746733/posts/112177164011445/?app=fbl😒😔😔
Great talk Lawrence, i did not learn much more than some trivia, but he explains some things so well, that ive had trouble getting across to some people,lol. Funny guy as well as smart:)
OK, you listened to Krauss and you understand how we got space, matter, and time naturally. Try to get that across to me and have evidence to back it up. Give me the laugh.
@@2fast2block oh dear. Mr 2fast2block, at it again, embarrassing himself over and over again. How long until you delete your comments and run from another comment section?
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
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.
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.
17:25 i love this guy !
I wish he could give this speech again now and tell us what’s changed since he gave this
The greatest talk ever,... so far.
Dear Dr Lawrence Krauss it is people like you and others that bring about new ideas and present them in simple ways. I am grateful to hear people like you and others talk about your ideas especially about the Universe from nothing. At first I thought this was nonsense but it appears to me this may be a viable idea. Of course I am just a beginner in this field.
You know I cannot thank everybody because the list goes on. So i will not mention only a few names because I think I must give equal credit to most. Thank you all and RUclips for their excellent service.
when you talk about empty space you are forgetting the fact that still there be space-time, which it self is some thing, and in the ausence of matter it collapces producing energy
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.
"The universe is big, and rare events happen all the time including life and that does not mean its special."
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....)
This is the single most impressive presentation I've ever seen. Never before have I been convinced that I should be doing more with my life besides working to keep the economy afloat.
Jimmy, you should not be swayed by these two dumb asses so easily. Get your life in order and start thinking for yourself. Or, continue to be a dumbass listing to these two clowns seriously.
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.
That talk was amazing
Not convincing though...can u explain what nothingness actually is??
@@wattt7467 Go read your bible dude
I've been to Tycho Brahe's island as a kid. This makes me want to visit again.
Why?
Krauss is inspirational and entertaining
He is a jaahil m’n ignorant man
But then time only ... can tell
I feel smarter and dumber at the same time
If you took Krauss seriously, there was no smart added to you.
@@2fast2block lol so true. Its been about a month now since I watched this. Time for a relisten
@@ChiTownsFinest1225 when you listen to it again, notice how he starts with space, matter, and time already there but lies and calls it nothing. Notice how he lies and says it's creating even more. Notice too how he ignores the laws of nature and can't even explain how we can get the laws of nature, naturally.
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.
By David AlbertMarch 23, 2012Lawrence M. Krauss, a well-known cosmologist and prolific popular-science writer, apparently means to announce to the world, in this new book, that the laws of quantum mechanics have in them the makings of a thoroughly scientific and adamantly secular explanation of why there is something rather than nothing. Period. Case closed. End of story. I kid you not. Look at the subtitle. Look at how Richard Dawkins sums it up in his afterword: “Even the last remaining trump card of the theologian, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?,’ shrivels up before your eyes as you read these pages. If ‘On the Origin of Species’ was biology’s deadliest blow to supernaturalism, we may come to see ‘A Universe From Nothing’ as the equivalent from cosmology. The title means exactly what it says. And what it says is devastating."
Well, let’s see. There are lots of different sorts of conversations one might want to have about a claim like that: conversations, say, about what it is to explain something, and about what it is to be a law of nature, and about what it is to be a physical thing. But since the space I have is limited, let me put those niceties aside and try to be quick, and crude, and concrete.
Where, for starters, are the laws of quantum mechanics themselves supposed to have come from? Krauss is more or less upfront, as it turns out, about not having a clue about that. He acknowledges (albeit in a parenthesis, and just a few pages before the end of the book) that everything he has been talking about simply takes the basic principles of quantum mechanics for granted. “I have no idea if this notion can be usefully dispensed with,” he writes, “or at least I don’t know of any productive work in this regard.” And what if he did know of some productive work in that regard? What if he were in a position to announce, for instance, that the truth of the quantum-mechanical laws can be traced back to the fact that the world has some other, deeper property X? Wouldn’t we still be in a position to ask why X rather than Y? And is there a last such question? Is there some point at which the possibility of asking any further such questions somehow definitively comes to an end? How would that work? What would that be like?
Never mind. Forget where the laws came from. Have a look instead at what they say. It happens that ever since the scientific revolution of the 17th century, what physics has given us in the way of candidates for the fundamental laws of nature have as a general rule simply taken it for granted that there is, at the bottom of everything, some basic, elementary, eternally persisting, concrete, physical stuff. Newton, for example, took that elementary stuff to consist of material particles. And physicists at the end of the 19th century took that elementary stuff to consist of both material particles and electromagnetic fields. And so on. And what the fundamental laws of nature are about, and all the fundamental laws of nature are about, and all there is for the fundamental laws of nature to be about, insofar as physics has ever been able to imagine, is how that elementary stuff is arranged. The fundamental laws of nature generally take the form of rules concerning which arrangements of that stuff are physically possible and which aren’t, or rules connecting the arrangements of that elementary stuff at later times to its arrangement at earlier times, or something like that. But the laws have no bearing whatsoever on questions of where the elementary stuff came from, or of why the world should have consisted of the particular elementary stuff it does, as opposed to something else, or to nothing at all.ADVERTISEMENTContinue reading the main storyThe fundamental physical laws that Krauss is talking about in “A Universe From Nothing” - the laws of relativistic quantum field theories - are no exception to this. The particular, eternally persisting, elementary physical stuff of the world, according to the standard presentations of relativistic quantum field theories, consists (unsurprisingly) of relativistic quantum fields. And the fundamental laws of this theory take the form of rules concerning which arrangements of those fields are physically possible and which aren’t, and rules connecting the arrangements of those fields at later times to their arrangements at earlier times, and so on - and they have nothing whatsoever to say on the subject of where those fields came from, or of why the world should have consisted of the particular kinds of fields it does, or of why it should have consisted of fields at all, or of why there should have been a world in the first place. Period. Case closed. End of story.
What on earth, then, can Krauss have been thinking? Well, there is, as it happens, an interesting difference between relativistic quantum field theories and every previous serious candidate for a fundamental physical theory of the world. Every previous such theory counted material particles among the concrete, fundamental, eternally persisting elementary physical stuff of the world - and relativistic quantum field theories, interestingly and emphatically and unprecedentedly, do not. According to relativistic quantum field theories, particles are to be understood, rather, as specific arrangements of the fields. Certain arrangements of the fields, for instance, correspond to there being 14 particles in the universe, and certain other arrangements correspond to there being 276 particles, and certain other arrangements correspond to there being an infinite number of particles, and certain other arrangements correspond to there being no particles at all. And those last arrangements are referred to, in the jargon of quantum field theories, for obvious reasons, as “vacuum” states. Krauss seems to be thinking that these vacuum states amount to the relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical version of there not being any physical stuff at all. And he has an argument - or thinks he does - that the laws of relativistic quantum field theories entail that vacuum states are unstable. And that, in a nutshell, is the account he proposes of why there should be something rather than nothing.
But that’s just not right. Relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical vacuum states - no less than giraffes or refrigerators or solar systems - are particular arrangements of elementary physical stuff. The true relativistic-quantum-field-theoretical equivalent to there not being any physical stuff at all isn’t this or that particular arrangement of the fields - what it is (obviously, and ineluctably, and on the contrary) is the simple absence of the fields! The fact that some arrangements of fields happen to correspond to the existence of particles and some don’t is not a whit more mysterious than the fact that some of the possible arrangements of my fingers happen to correspond to the existence of a fist and some don’t. And the fact that particles can pop in and out of existence, over time, as those fields rearrange themselves, is not a whit more mysterious than the fact that fists can pop in and out of existence, over time, as my fingers rearrange themselves. And none of these poppings - if you look at them aright - amount to anything even remotely in the neighborhood of a creation from nothing.
Krauss, mind you, has heard this kind of talk before, and it makes him crazy. A century ago, it seems to him, nobody would have made so much as a peep about referring to a stretch of space without any material particles in it as “nothing.” And now that he and his colleagues think they have a way of showing how everything there is could imaginably have emerged from a stretch of space like that, the nut cases are moving the goal posts. He complains that “some philosophers and many theologians define and redefine ‘nothing’ as not being any of the versions of nothing that scientists currently describe,” and that “now, I am told by religious critics that I cannot refer to empty space as ‘nothing,’ but rather as a ‘quantum vacuum,’ to distinguish it from the philosopher’s or theologian’s idealized ‘nothing,’ ” and he does a good deal of railing about “the intellectual bankruptcy of much of theology and some of modern philosophy.” But all there is to say about this, as far as I can see, is that Krauss is dead wrong and his religious and philosophical critics are absolutely right. Who cares what we would or would not have made a peep about a hundred years ago? We were wrong a hundred years ago. We know more now. And if what we formerly took for nothing turns out, on closer examination, to have the makings of protons and neutrons and tables and chairs and planets and solar systems and galaxies and universes in it, then it wasn’t nothing, and it couldn’t have been nothing, in the first place. And the history of science - if we understand it correctly - gives us no hint of how it might be possible to imagine otherwise.
His wife reminded him that she is the center of the universe everyday lol
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.
That was absolutely fantastic. What a brilliant and engaging speaker.
Lawrie They do tell their lies very 'brilliantly'! All they are 'really' saying is that a mathematical equation says its possible. They have absolutely 'zero' evidence that it does! So if you choose to believe what they say as 'true'... it is a "religious" belief! NOT a 'fact'!
@@jimhappnin1425 I never suggested it was a fact. Nor can it be a lie. It's a scientific theory which happens to go a lot further in offering an explanation than any religion I've come across.
Lawrie Lets look at this from a logical point of view. We 'know' we are alive on this earth. We also 'know' that this earth did NOT always exist. That means there HAD to be an 'origin'. There is only two possible origins. 1. Whatever created this world was 'intelligent'. 2. Whatever created this world was 'inanimate'. If you deny that this world was created by an 'intelligent' God... then how was 'nature' able to accomplish this task 'without' any purpose and 'without' the power of thought???
@@jimhappnin1425 All I did was comment that I enjoyed the video. Why are you trying to convert me?
Lawrie I'm NOT trying to convert you. I'm simply telling you the truth. I don't really care what you choose to believe. What you choose to do will have no impact on me! It just seems to me that you have convinced yourself that a world such as this earth can simply assemble itself without any 'purpose' and without the power of 'thought'! 'Logic' tells us that is impossible. So I guess my question to you is this: Why would you choose to believe that???
55:12 “I pleaded with her to leave it in!”
Yeah, I wonder how many missed the double entendre in that sentence.
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.
@@clintonhaws8984 Communism has more in common with religion than you think, dawg. There's a reason why theocracy is called theocracy.
People have this need to be special in the universe with all their faries and magic, but they forget that living in this universe is special by itself.
Dingbat, it's YOU that needs magic for a natural creation. Oh, but do tell how it happened that way, you clown.
Haven't watched, yet.
The origin of everything, the Inertial plane.
Casimir Effect Universe, Space and Counterspace are the plates, the Inertial plane attracts and repels the plates.
The first to leave the Inertial plane was Dielectric, then Dielectric voidence/magnetism.
The crowd didn’t catch the STAR WARS joke “Far Far away, Long, Long time ago”
They just didn't see it as funny.
You didn't catch this whole video was a joke by these dingbats.
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 🤦♂️
If, in the future, we will not be able to observe necessary information to create a realistic model of the actual universe, I wonder what information we aren't able to observe today.
God Bless this Man.
i cant tell if this is an atheist joke lmao
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.
@@James-gk8ip 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.
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.
See also Freeman Dyson. the article "Time Without End: Physics and Biology in an Open Universe".
He says that future civilizations can stay in touch, biology and "life" or some sort of memory and intelligence can continue.
He gives a rough estimate of the time left for culture and communication of 10^10^76 years from now.
Love him! 👍🏼✌🏻🌻
So you love liars. Wow.
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.
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.
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?
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein
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.
*What a great teacher!!!*
What a pathetic liar.
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.
It is very illogical and Krauss admits that “Some of this bothers people. But who cares? Quantum mechanics is illogical-just get over it.”
No, we won't get over your lies of calling something nothing and having that something do things unproven.
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 Thanks for the sermon but no one's going to wade through all that. Try to make a succinct point that doesn't reek of desperation.
@@2fast2block Your entire reasoning is the tired old "Argument from Ignorance". Even if you're right that this must have been created by something what can you now say about that something?
And who created that something? Because if you don't have an answer to that then you don't have an argument.
@@warren52nz being the complete loser you are, you could not prove me wrong but in your empty life going nowhere, you totally ignored it.
@@2fast2block Nice Ad Hominem (look it up).
It's impossible to PROVE a god doesn't exist because it's not clearly defined anywhere.
But it's possible in theory to disprove evolution because it IS completely defined but you can't because it's an obvious fact.
So did you manage to find just ONE biologist who says it isn't a fact? No, because it IS a fact and every bit of evidence that deals with the subject supports it.
There's only one loser in this dialogue (hint: it's not me). 🤣