ASimon:
I have read a good portion of Krauss and watched probably all of his youtube lectures. He never loses the presupposition that “nothing = something.” I cannot think of a single instance where he gets the idea of
real nothingness right. Therefore, he always argues against a straw man.
Then you are probably well equipped to show us where the motion of immobile reality began.
jd
I second JD. After watching the video, it seems like he is trying to provide an illusion that what we presumed to be nothing is nothing when something much smaller or different than what we presumed to be matter is there. Where do laws of nature come from? Nothing is nothing…as in the absence of everything, including any form of ray, gravity, shape, and law…anything. You can’t have laws of nothing because that means that there are no laws…Laws are indeed something, as they dictate how things act and interact, so either the laws of nature are “formed” by this dark matter which also controls dark matter itself (kind of contradicting itself, I think), the laws are entirely random, or the laws existed before dark matter, which is presumed to be eternal(?) …which leads to another question.
So if the energy of the big bang formed from dark energy and matter, which is infinite, then infinity would have to expand, contract, or remain constant. Obviously it would have to remain constant, but then it would still have to make up 100% of the universe; not the 80 or 70 percent that he said in the video. Unless, of course, dark energy is constantly creating more of its infinite self. What I mean is: if you have infinity you can’t add or subtract from infinity and get rational or real number ( I haven’t taken calculus in a while, so I am not entirely sure if that was the rule), so if it was 100% of infinity, and then and additional 20 percent was created in the form of actual matter, did the dark energy create additional energy i.e. energy was created? Or did the new energy form from condensed dark energy i.e. infinity would contract. If there is a physicist here, feel free to correct me. I haven’t taken any advanced physics and am just using logic (which, I admit, could be faulty)
Also, I presume that it can’t still be 100% dark matter because if it were the experiment would pick it up instantaneously, so that can’t be it either ( I don’t think).
I am not trying to sound rude or anything; I am just discussing the video (sorry, I know it is a little bit off topic).
Last thing, if I understood his explanation of dark energy, it is the negative energy caused by gravity, which makes our system 0 energy, but then where did the positive energy come from before there was positive matter (which are the planets, stars etc.)? Was it entirely negative before it was positive? Where did energy come from? Or was there no energy before gravity? Okay, I think I am confusing myself now and making myself look like an idiot, so I am going to go and re-watch the video to make sure I understood it.
