Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Physics and the contemplation of nothing

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

In a review of Void: The Strange Physics of Nothing by James Owen Weatherall, Steven Poole writes at Spectator (UK):

In an action-packed epilogue, the author describes how the contested field of string theory posits a bogglingly large number of possible kinds of nothingness, and impresses upon the reader how much of physics still depends on intuition and battling ‘interpretations’. The book is not an exhaustive typology of scientific nothings: not directly addressed, for example, is the nothingness that supposedly obtained before the Big Bang. But to regret this is just to emphasise the success of this stylishly written and admirably concise book, at the end of which you will be inclined to agree, along with the author and Freddie Mercury both, that ‘Nothing really matters.’More.

String theory leads physics down the bramble patch of unacknowledged metaphysics.

See also: Multiverse explains why progress in fundamental physics is slow?

and

Must we understand “nothing” to understand physics?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
KF:
Understanding the ideological agenda also helps us understand the mindset of many objectors. KF
This, of course presupposes an ideological agenda exists with your objectors. And, if one does not exists, some feel it necessary to fabricate one so that they can argue against it. Pretty standard strawman tactic. We all have ideologies, in a broad and literal interpretation of the word. In that we all act based on the assemblage of ideas that we have developed for ourselves based on evidence, experience and teaching (in some cases, indoctrination). Most Christians had Christian parents. Most Muslims had Muslim parents, and most Hindus had Hindu parents. This is a prime example of the teaching/indoctrination aspect of ideology. Many people convert, become atheist/agnostic or adopt a faith. This is an example of the influence of evidence and experience. This being said, to infer that your objectors have some sort of nefarious agenda is simply a fallacy. I can only speak for myself, but my only agenda, is to assist in the development of the best explanatory models of what we perceive around us. Admittedly, neither you nor I, nor most of the people who post here, really contribute anything of significance to this effort. Our efforts, at best, are nothing more than entertaining distractions. We really shouldn't take ourselves so seriously.Armand Jacks
March 11, 2017
March
03
Mar
11
11
2017
08:53 AM
8
08
53
AM
PDT
KF @2, That was good. From nothing, nothing can ever come, so if there is something, something necessarily always was, an utterly non-contingent reality the essence of which is "to be," upon which all else is contingent. It has always struck me how superior in philosophical sophistication the Hebrew Scriptures were regarding the accounts of origins compared to the texts of other ancient religions. The God of the Hebrews creates ex nihilo and identifies Himself as "I AM WHO AM." Amazing.harry
March 11, 2017
March
03
Mar
11
11
2017
01:45 AM
1
01
45
AM
PDT
Harry, you are right, nothing properly denotes non-being. Not matter, not energy, not waves, not space, not mind etc., non-being. Literally, NO-thing. Where, non-being can have no causal capacity so were there ever utter nothing (= nothing but nothing!) such would forever obtain. Logic of being -- as opposed to physics, a science that studies matter, energy, space-time and interactions -- then implies that as a world manifestly is, something always was, something is a necessary being. And as contingent beings are not necessary, such are in the end rooted in this necessary being. Onward, that points to framework reality at the root of possible worlds. As in, the proper discussion is, what is the NB at root of this and other possible worlds. A couple of clues lie in how we are morally governed (even in how we reason), and that both the world of life and the observed cosmos show copious signs of intelligent design. However, this cuts across entrenched ideological interests and so we see the huge controversy at the core of the focus for this blog. Understanding the ideological agenda also helps us understand the mindset of many objectors. KFkairosfocus
March 11, 2017
March
03
Mar
11
11
2017
01:06 AM
1
01
06
AM
PDT
The thing to understand about material and temporal nothingness is that it is just that: nothing. So any discussion of "kinds" of material and temporal nothingness is absurd, at least when by nothingness we mean the absence of space, time, matter and energy. The absence of material and temporal realities, i.e., natural realities, is a situation from which nothing can ever come by natural means. Only some kind of supernatural reality can bring natural realities into existence from material and temporal nothingness. That is why it took decades for atheistic science to accept the Big Bang theory in spite of ever increasing corroborating evidence for the theory. The same kind of thing will eventually happen with ID theory due to the ever increasing corroborating evidence for it. See, for example: The Designed Body, Continued: Coherence Wins, Gradualism Fails on the Evolution News web site.harry
March 10, 2017
March
03
Mar
10
10
2017
07:46 PM
7
07
46
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply