Even space and time themselves might be a kind of holographic illusion.

These dangerous comedians - Comment on 2012 February 25 (5)

Website: countdown4us.com
Home | Comments | Creation | Redemption Period | Miscellaneous
Home > Comments > 2012 > Comment on 2012 February 25 (5)

2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |

2012 February 25 (5)

Go to the end of this webpage:

The multiverse, a nearly infinite assemblage of universes, each with its own randomly determined rules, particles and forces, that represent solutions to the basic equations of string theory - the alleged theory of everything, or perhaps, as wags say, anything. Read more:

At the beginning of this year I had the entry 2012 Jan 17 – The problems of the physicists and there it was about that the theories of the physicists do not really seem to work and one has to look for something else.

In that entry were quotes from an article and there the following questions were asked:

How does science react to this when expectations are disappointed? How flexible can a theory be brought into line when its predictions get into conflict with the measurements? How long does one accept the modifications of a theory to the adaptation of measurement data when these adaptations increasingly endanger the original simplicity and beauty of the theory?

So it looks as if science and especially physics is in a stage where they start to look for something else.

During the last few weeks I brought some Seth material and in one of these entries, 2012 Feb 10 – Scientists and clerics, was Seth quoted saying:

Why do you find the phrase solidified feeling outlandish? You both already understand that your plane is really composed of solidified thought. When your scientists get through with all their high fiddle-faddle they too will discover that this is the case, though woe to any one of them that dares breathe such a concept yet.

That was from the year 1965 and since then nearly half a century has past and all high fiddle-faddle of the scientists still seems to carry on and may be they are now on the verge to lose their mind. Here another quote from Seth, from 1964:

Your scientists can count their elements. While they are on the wrong track they will discover more and more elements. That is, they will create more and discover more until they are ready to go out of their minds. Because what will happen is, they will always create camouflages of the real thing.

And now a third one from Seth:

When the physical origin of your universe is finally discovered, your scientist will be no better off than they are now. They will immediately be up against the problem that above all others they have avoided for so long, that of the origin behind the origin.

So maybe we are now slowly coming to the point where scientist, because all their models do not really work, get on the track of the real thing and discover the physical origin of our universe and find out that there was no big bang but that each and every one of us creates the material world out of the unconscious and that several times per second.

So we seem to live in interesting times and we will carry on watching these dangerous comedians and see what they are going to do next.

Today I read an article that seems to reflect the frustrations of the materialists, the ones who do scientific research and also those who write and report about it.

Here some excerpts of what I read:


It is, perhaps, the mystery of last resort. Scientists may be at least theoretically able to trace every last galaxy back to a bump in the Big Bang, to complete the entire quantum roll call of particles and forces. But the question of why there was a Big Bang or any quantum particles at all was presumed to lie safely out of scientific bounds, in the realms of philosophy or religion.

Now even that assumption is no longer safe, as exemplified by a new book by the cosmologist Lawrence M. Krauss. In it he joins a chorus of physicists and cosmologists who have been pushing into sacred ground, proclaiming more and more loudly in the last few years that science can explain how something - namely our star-spangled cosmos - could be born from, if not nothing, something very close to it. God, they argue, is not part of the equation. The book, ”Universe From Nothing,” is a best seller and follows recent popular tomes like ”God Is Not Great,” by the late Christopher Hitchens; “The God Delusion,” by Richard Dawkins; and “The Grand Design,” by the British cosmologist Stephen Hawking (with Leonard Mlodinow), which generated headlines two years ago with its assertion that physicists do not need God to account for the universe.

Dr. Krauss . . . has been an outspoken critic of attempts to introduce creationist ideas and to censor the teaching of evolution in schools and textbooks.

Dr. Krauss, a self-described nonbeliever, . . .

The total energy of the universe might actually be zero, according to the strange bookkeeping of Einstein’s general theory of relativity, as Dr. Krauss points out.

Even space and time themselves might be a kind of holographic illusion, string theorists say.

You might think to dispute this by kicking a rock, but remember that both the rock and your foot are mostly empty space, prevented from intermingling by electric fields.

Dr. Krauss delineates three different kinds of nothingness. First is what may have passed muster as nothing with the ancient Greeks: empty space. But we now know that even empty space is filled with energy, vibrating with electromagnetic fields and so-called virtual particles dancing in and out of existence on borrowed energy courtesy of the randomness that characterizes reality on the smallest scales, according to the rules of quantum theory.

Second is nothing, without even space and time. Following a similar quantum logic, theorists have proposed that whole universes, little bubbles of space-time, could pop into existence, like bubbles in boiling water, out of this nothing.

There is a deeper nothing in which even the laws of physics are absent. Where do the laws come from? Are they born with the universe, or is the universe born in accordance with them? Here Dr. Krauss, unhappily in my view, resorts to the newest and most controversial toy in the cosmologist’s toolbox: the multiverse, a nearly infinite assemblage of universes, each with its own randomly determined rules, particles and forces, that represent solutions to the basic equations of string theory - the alleged theory of everything, or perhaps, as wags say, anything.

But even the multiverse is not totally lawless, as Dr. Krauss acknowledged. We are not quite there yet. At the very least, there would still be the string equations and those quantum principles that undergird them. Is quantum randomness the secret of existence?

“Maybe in the true eternal multiverse there are truly no laws,” Dr. Krauss said in an e-mail. “Maybe indeed randomness is all there is and everything that can happen happens somewhere.”

It would be silly to think that we won’t have better answers and better questions 50 or 100 years from now, but for the moment this is the story science can tell. If you find it bleak, that is your problem. “The universe is the way it is, whether we like it or not,” Dr. Krauss writes.

If nothing is our past, it could also be our future. As the universe, driven by dark energy - that is to say, the negative pressure of nothing - expands faster and faster, the galaxies will become invisible, and all the energy and information will be sucked out of the cosmos. The universe will revert to nothingness.


Three names were mentioned above, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking. Here some links to webpages of this website about these guys:
2011 Dec 24 (2) – Christopher Hitchens, an atheist
2012 Feb 06 – Evolution
2012 Jan 25 (3) – The basic Universe


Back to: 2012 February 25 (5)


Go to the top of this webpage:

2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |

Home | Comments | Creation | Redemption Period | Miscellaneous

For an overview of this website and for access to the individual webpages go to:
Site Map

The web address of this webpage is: