Environment A Universe From Nothing Krauss Pdf


Wednesday, June 26, 2019

The book ”Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing” Krauss has stimulated a lot of aggressive debate between. PDF | We study some claims in Krauss' recent book, \emph{A Universe from Nothing: Why there is something rather than nothing}, that are. A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing. Home · A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Author: Lawrence M. Krauss.

Language:English, Spanish, Hindi
Published (Last):09.02.2016
ePub File Size:17.56 MB
PDF File Size:17.26 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Uploaded by: LEONILA

Markus Heitkoetter: The Complete Guide To Day Trading™ √PDF An analysis of the book “A Universe from Nothing” by Lawrence M. Krauss “under Can D. Bestselling author and acclaimed physicist Lawrence Krauss offers a paradigm- shifting view of how everything that exists came to be in the first place. A universe from nothing: why there is something rather than nothing/ Lawrence M. Krauss ; with an afterword by Richard Dawkins, p. cm. Includes index. 1.

During his time there he gave a talk on his latest idea — that empty space might contain energy. That young physicist was Saul Perlmutter, who last month picked up a Nobel prize — not for proving Krauss wrong, as it turns out, but for proving him right. Krauss is an exemplary interpreter of tough science, and the central part of the book, where he discusses what we know about the history of the universe — and how we know it — is perfectly judged. It is detailed but lucid, thorough but not stodgy. It is remarkable to think that, a century ago, quantum theory was barely formed, general relativity was a work in progress and only a few scientists believed there was a beginning to the universe. We have come a long, long way since then by developing scientific tools that have proved themselves both reliable and remarkably fruitful.

Krauss is an exemplary interpreter of tough science, and the central part of the book, where he discusses what we know about the history of the universe — and how we know it — is perfectly judged.

It is detailed but lucid, thorough but not stodgy. It is remarkable to think that, a century ago, quantum theory was barely formed, general relativity was a work in progress and only a few scientists believed there was a beginning to the universe. We have come a long, long way since then by developing scientific tools that have proved themselves both reliable and remarkably fruitful.

Ultimately, though, he has to perform a little sleight of hand. In the end, the best answer is that they arise from our existence within a multiverse, where all the universes have their own laws — ours being just so for no particular reason.

Truthfully, it just puts the question beyond science — for now, at least.

That said, we should be happy to be preached to so intelligently. That leaves the reader with the entirely wrong sense of having just ingested a polemic, rather than an excellent guide to the cutting edge of physics.

Trending Latest Video Free. Earth is sending us really powerful messages David Attenborough finally talks climate change in prime time BBC slot Prepare to jump to light speed: The methods involved here are really quite ingenious, so I would like to take a brief moment to explain them.

First off, we all know that gravity sucks in that it is an attractive force. Interestingly though, the information of gravitational attraction can, like all other entities travelling through space, only travel as fast as the speed of light and no faster.

Now, consider a blob of matter that is over light years across at a time when the universe is only years old the time of the last scattering surface. Such a blob is certainly ripe for collapsing in on itself by the force of gravity. However, because the universe is only years old, there has not yet been enough time for the information of gravity to pass through the entire span of the blob. Therefore, the blob will not as yet have existed long enough to start collapsing: Coyote runs straight off a cliff and hangs suspended in midair in the road runner cartoons, the lump will just sit there, waiting to collapse when the universe becomes old enough for it to know what it is supposed to do!

As a result of this, the largest blob of matter that we can expect to be collapsing in on itself at the time of the last scattering surface will be roughly light years across p. Now, the size of collapsing blobs of matter leaves an imprint on the cosmic radiation that is shuttling through space in the form of temperature fluctuations [p. By using computer simulations and straightforward geometry , then, we can recreate how the cosmic radiation should look depending on whether the last scattering surface is conventional and flat or warped either in an open or closed orientation p.

Here is a graph showing the actual configuration of cosmic radiation in the universe as measured by BOOMERANG compared with computer simulations of the configurations of a closed, flat, and open universe:.

When the data returned, here is the story it told: Something is amiss, though.

A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing - PDF Free Download

Now, the cosmic radiation probes were revealing a flat universe. What could account for the discrepancy here?

If you thought the existence of dark matter was strange, hang on to your hat, because the picture of our universe is about to get a whole lot stranger. As mentioned above, our calculation of the mass of matter in the universe is hindered by the fact that we are only able to measure the amount of matter in galaxy clusters.

Now that the cosmic radiation probes were pointing towards a flat universe, it certainly appeared as though we were in fact overlooking a significant amount of mass that existed between galaxy clusters. There is another possibility, however. Given that this is the case, it is possible that the missing bit of stuff in our universe is not matter at all, but energy. This energy would have to be anti-gravitational in nature, and be something that we had not yet been able to detect.

As outlandish as this sounds, we will recall that Einstein himself had once postulated such a force in order to square his theory with the idea that the universe is static.

When it was discovered that the universe was expanding—apparently from the force of a very hot big bang—Einstein came to regret postulating the cosmological constant p. More than half a century later, though, it was starting to appear as though Einstein might have been right after all. Ironically, though, while the universe is an entity that exists at the largest of scales indeed the largest scale , in order to make further headway in our understanding here we must revert to a branch of physics that deals with phenomenon operating at the very smallest of scales: Quantum mechanics is a theory that developed between and as a way to explain the behaviour of elementary particles, such as electrons, which move in ways that are far different than everyday objects such as baseballs and bubble gum p.

Indeed, it is fairly safe to say that quantum mechanics makes minced meat of common sense. At the heart of quantum mechanics is a particular principle that is responsible for most of the mayhem: The Uncertainty Principle tells us that when it comes to the smallest of particles, it is impossible to measure more than 1 of a pair of complementary properties such as velocity and location, or energy and time frame accurately and not just because of a practical issue, but because of a theoretical constraint.

One repercussion of the Uncertainty Principle is that elementary particles are allowed to act in very peculiar ways, so long as they do so in a time frame that is too short to be measured accurately. In the same vein, but even more strangely, quantum mechanics allows for elementary particles to pop in and out of existence—as long as they do so in a time frame that is too short to measure. For instance, in one such scenario, two particles with opposite charge pop into existence next to a pre-existing electron, then the new particle with the positive charge collides with the original electron causing both to be annihilated, and leaving the third to persist p.

Particles that pop in and out of existence too quickly to be observed are called virtual particles p.

Now, if virtual particles are gone before they can be measured then we might well ask how it is we know that they truly exist? We know that they exist because, while we cannot observe them directly, we can observe their effects.

For instance, when we look at the electrical properties of an atom, such as a hydrogen atom with one proton and one electron , it turns out that the electrical properties of this atom cannot be explained by its single proton and electron alone p. However, when we assume the existence of virtual particles, the new calculation not only agrees with what we observe more closely, but to the remarkably accurate degree of 1 part in a billion or better p.

As it turns out, electrons are not the only entities out of which virtual particles pop into existence. Indeed, virtual particles are also thought to be constantly popping in and out of existence next to the quarks that make up protons and neutrons p. Here, they interact with the quarks and the energy fields between quarks to themselves generate energy p.

In fact, the energy that is created by the existence of virtual particles within protons and neutrons actually makes up the majority of the energy, and hence the mass, of protons and neutrons p.

Since the mass of all baryonic matter is accounted for by the mass of the protons and neutrons within it, and since this mass is made up mostly of the energy created by virtual particles, then the mass of baryonic matter including your own body is made up mostly of virtual particles popping in and out of existence in empty space! So, if virtual particles are capable of generating energy in empty space in atoms, then what is to stop them from generating energy out of the empty space in the universe?

If they did so, they might just be responsible for the energy in the universe that is necessary to account for its flat shape. The least we could do would be to calculate how much energy should exist in the empty space in the universe dubbed dark energy [p. So much for the idea that energy permeates empty space. Or was it? As mentioned earlier, it was known at this point that the universe is expanding. As for the precise expansion rate of the universe, this was not known.

However it was assumed at the very least that the expansion rate of the universe is slowing down, since it was understood that the dominant form of energy in the universe is gravity—an attractive force that opposes the expansion of the universe and will necessarily slow it down p. The technique that was employed involves measuring the velocity and distance of far distant supernovae p. Scientists immediately set out to perform the required observations in order to determine the precise rate at which the expansion of the universe was slowing down, since this represented another way to determine the shape of the universe, and hence its future p.

What the scientists discovered shocked everyone. The expansion of the universe was not in fact slowing down, but speeding up p. A universe that is expanding at an accelerating rate implies that there must exist a form of energy in the universe that not only opposes gravity, but that outweighs it.

Suddenly, the idea of a form of energy permeating empty space was not looking so far-fetched after all. In fact, it is the only thing that could explain an accelerating and flat universe p. As incredible as this sounds, discovery after discovery since the universe was first observed to be expanding at an accelerating rate has corroborated that this is precisely what we have p. Included amongst these discoveries is that the universe is precisely This number was derived from the extremely precise measurement of the cosmic radiation of the universe provided by the WMAP satellite probe in p.

Lawrence Krauss On 'A Universe From Nothing'

That is, the age of the universe in conjunction with other discoveries that we have made suggests that dark energy must exist, and it must exist in a form such that it permeates space with a uniform density throughout p.

The strange thing about energy existing in the form of a cosmological constant is that it implies that as the universe expands the amount of this energy increases p. How is it that the amount of energy in empty space is allowed to increase? As it turns out, this can be explained by an implication of the theory of relativity.

According to general relativity, any amount of energy in empty space will cause this empty space to have negative pressure. It is this negative pressure, in fact, that causes the energy in empty space to behave in a gravitationally repulsive way.

Since empty space infused with energy is gravitationally repulsive, it naturally expands, and as it does so it draws energy into itself.

As a result of this negative pressure, the universe actually does work on empty space as it expands. As helium is pumped into a balloon it becomes pressurized by the constraining inner walls of the balloon. In pushing against the inner walls of the balloon, and causing them to expand, the helium does work on the balloon, and in so doing expends energy causing the gas itself to cool. In empty space it is just the opposite.

Unlike the helium gas which has positive pressure , empty space infused with energy has negative pressure, so when empty space expands, rather than expending energy as the helium does , it draw energy into itself. The full implications of this are staggering for it implies that if you start with an infinitesimally small amount of empty space infused with an infinitesimally small amount of energy, you can end up with an infinitesimally large universe infused with energy p.

We are now well on our way to understanding how a universe everything might arise from nothing. However, there are still a couple of obstacles that stand in our way. For one, how do you get even an infinitesimal amount of energy in empty space out of nothing? Actually, we have already seen how. Recall that the empty space within protons is teeming with virtual particles that pop in and out of existence out of nothing.

This is the result of quantum laws that govern phenomenon that occur at the very smallest of scales. Systems continue to move, if just momentarily, between all possible states, including states that would not be allowed if the system were actually measured.

Additionally, even though these virtual particles pop in and out of existence faster than you can measure them, they produce tangible effects on the world: One way to understand all of this is to say that nothing is capable of producing something because nothing is unstable: All of this may strike us as being completely counter-intuitive, and therefore very hard to believe. It certainly seems sensible to imagine that a priori, matter cannot spontaneously arise from empty space, so that something, in this sense, cannot arise from nothing.

So, we have established that, according to our best science as counter-intuitive as it sounds , an infinitesimal amount of energy could pop out of empty space to generate our current universe. But this presupposes that we already have an infinitesimal amount of empty space out of which energy could emerge.

So, we are still left with the mystery of how to get an infinitesimal amount of empty space out of nothing. Here, things become more speculative. However, Krauss argues that we may be able to side step this conundrum by stretching the quantum phenomenon of virtual particles popping into existence out of nothing, to empty space itself popping into existence out of nothing.

As it turns out, this possibility is not just a case of wild speculation. If a bit of empty space were created out of nothing which would be a universe unto itself , and if a quantum fluctuation were to occur in this pocket of empty space that produced a bit of energy before it managed to collapse back in on itself, we might well get the universe we have today.

So, according to our current best laws of physics, it is possible to get something out of empty space, and it is plausible that empty space itself might be able to pop out of nothing. But what about the laws of physics themselves?

How could they arise out of nothing? According to Krauss, even this conundrum might be soluble.

The conundrum becomes a great deal less perplexing when we consider that our universe may not in fact be the only one around.

Indeed, the two leading theories of physics standard particle physics and string theory both propose that there are in fact multiple and most likely an infinite number of universes p. What is meant by this is that there may be numerous even infinite regions of space that are causally cut off from one another and that are governed by different laws of physics.

Lawrence M. Krauss - A Universe from Nothing.pdf - PRAISE...

If this were the case then it would not so much be the case that the laws of physics in our universe have a distinct cause. Rather, they may simply be the result of random chance, and a reality where any law of physics that is possible becomes actual somewhere: Whether or not our universe came from nothing, it certainly seems to be heading towards nothingness or at least something like it. Indeed, the presence of a cosmological constant of dark energy in our universe implies that the universe will continue to expand at an ever accelerating rate, to the point where this expansion will exceed even the speed of light.

Once the expansion of the universe reaches superluminal speeds, the universe will became inhospitable to life: Beyond this, matter itself will begin to break down, and dissolve: Far, far into the future, protons and neutrons will decay, matter will disappear, and the universe will approach a state of maximum simplicity and symmetry.

And this may in fact be the best case scenario. This is the story from standard particle physics, but if string theory turns out to be true, the universe appears to be in store for actual nothingess.

Eventually, it must decay to a state in which the energy associated with space will be negative. Our universe will then recollapse inward to a point, returning to the quantum haze from which our own existence may have begun.

A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing

If these arguments are correct, our universe will then disappear as abruptly as it probably began. A Universe from Nothing: To purchase the book from Audible. Audio Book. If you have enjoyed this summary of A Universe from Nothing: Each of my articles follows the same form and is similar in length pages.

The free articles are available here: Free Articles.

FREDIA from South Dakota
Also read my other posts. I have only one hobby: video game collecting. I do like sharing PDF docs gladly .