"Lawrence Krauss - Life, the Universe, and Nothing: A Cosmic Mystery Story "

Webcast sponsored by Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the Vancouver Institute. Lawrence Krauss' work has been primarily in theoretical (as opposed to experimental) physics, and he has published research on a great variety of topics within that field. Krauss is a renowned cosmologist and popularizer of modern science and director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University. Hailed by Scientific American as a rare public intellectual, he is the author of more than three hundred scientific publications and 8 books, including the bestselling The Physics of Star Trek, and the recipient of numerous international awards for his research and writing. He is an internationally known theoretical physicist with wide research interests, including the interface between elementary particle physics and cosmology, where his studies include the early universe, the nature of dark matter, general relativity and neutrino astrophysics. His soon to be published book, A Universe From Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing is already garnering strong reviews. Exploring the scientific advances that provide insight into how the universe formed, Krauss ultimately tackles the age-old assumption that something cannot arise from nothing by arguing that not only can something arise from nothing, but something will always arise from nothing.

[@geoden]

I've come across many things in this lecture before, but I still wish I'd seen it 8 years ago.

[@jeanmeslier9491]

The distance of many galaxies was calculated by the janitor, who never completed high school. Milton Humason's meticulous work so impressed Hubble that he made him his assistant. Hubble had him added to the astronomical staff as a full member. Some of the other astronomers got all in a snit about it. A very interesting story within itself.

[@ozthaisurprise]

WOW. What an intelligent and passionate person and a great communicator. From Melbourne Australia

[@bySelie]

looking at that exploding star in the example gives me goosebumps.. that thing is intense..

[@davidrobinson4118]

Absolutely brilliant. Professor Kraus could give a lecture on how paint dries and make it interesting.

[@HeapOfEmpty]

Pre-youtube only dozens would have seen it.

[@garychap8384]

Kraus is just an incredible speaker. With great humour and insight, he never fails to make the subject inviting, enthralling and memorable. The man is a born educator : ) There's nothing in this talk I didn't already know - and yet, still, I sit here riveted : D

[@glutinousmaximus]

People have trouble with the term 'nothing'. It's not surprising I suppose. We can't actually point to a concrete example of such a concept - it's completely abstract. What Lawrence is referring to is actually 'space'. There is no known place in the universe where there is 'nothing'. Even voids like the Boötes void which is a huge volume of space with little matter, still has plenty of stuff in it, like radiation and light passing through, gravity waves and around one atom of hydrogen per cubic metre. Good lecture by Lawrence.

[@-_Nuke_-]

Thank you for being one of the few intelligent beings inside this comment section filled with religious morons.

[@Sharperthanu1]

You have to remember that all versions of nothing,space extra dimensions whatever you want go call them GO ON FOREVER. That fact breaks the laws of classical physics and anyone or anything that breaks the laws of classical physics is Metaphysical.The eternal void that our universe exploded out of at the time of the big bang ( that scientists have abundant proof actually happened) is the theoretical opposite of physics and therefore it's Metaphysical.

[@kn9ioutom]

GREAT LECTURE !!!

[@helenbostock2350]

Thanks you have the written launage that goes along the screen it really helps me. You explain it so well. I watch you later because its a lot to take in. I think you're right

[@kennylong7281]

09:30 What Hubbell discovered was REFRACTION. It is common sense that light which has travelled over billions of light-years across space, and been bounced around, and filtered through unimaginable quantities of interstellar dust and had to pass unimaginable quantities of objects, large and small, that that light has been subjected to, over and over again, to REFRACTION. "Red Shift" cannot always to be interpreted as "Doppler Effect", but can be just as well be explained by REFRACTION. Especially because in increases with distance!

[@Just.A.T-Rex]

Yes you surely know more than this guy! You tell him!

[@Paulsdottir]

so exciting and interesting, thank you!

[@guywebber9312]

ONE OF HIS BEST

[@charlestownsend9280]

The end of this lecture is interesting after we have detected both the Higgs boson and gravitational waves.

[@kubaguma]

Great, thank you

[@robertmcclintock8701]

Everytime an artist make something social and intelligent it has artistic integrity. That only possible in a created universe.

[@MrPetalhead]

Bloody nice chap .... enjoyed his talk

[@klausantitheistbolvig8372]

I knew that, but he tells it so good everyone should be able to understand that. One said if you can’t explain a complicated thing easy, you might even understand it. Lucky for these people who have lectures from Krause .

[@LindaStevensBZ]

GREAT VIDEO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@khunopie9159]

LindaStevensBZ This is more BS propaganda. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

[@grindupBaker]

I didn't yet hear anybody state in any of the lectures on this topic whether it has been proved that a "Big Bang" could not occur inside our universe (presumably mucking it up a bit). I'm not educated in this topic so I'm using an analogy for myself o an infinite calm ocean of "nothing" where a vast spike got banged up and is spreading as a smooth tsunami (the "nothing" energy) with a gazillion tiny blips in it (matter & energy). Works for me for now.

[@elaghs1504]

Thank you master. ❤️

[@prsplayer210]

Doesn anyone know the name of the supernova pictured at 17:00? i want to find that image but seeing as there are thousands of images from hubble, knowing it's name may help?

[@BlueOceanBelow]

+David N I know it's been a year since your comment, but the galaxy pictured is NGC 4526.

[@guywebber9312]

Thank you

[@elenna_alexia]

So sad that this doesn't have more views while videos that have no significant value to our understanding of anything have tens of millions of views. But with the five minute attention span many of my generation seem to exhibit it doesn't even seem all to surprising.

[@TheAtlashead23]

Yeah, I know that of course. I'm not sure why I said that. I probably was referring to something Krauss says in his talk. Not sure, it was awhile ago.

[@peteyofcanada]

I would really appreciate proper closed-captioning for this and other UBC videos.

[@prsplayer210]

my dream is to one day move to canada

[@microfarmers]

Such limited information can be deduced from scientific research. Except the fact that we are nothing in the physical, and everything in the spiritual. Something can not come from nothing. We just can't conceive everything or nothing.

[@120perfecthalf]

00:01:25 he always says that he used to live in Cleveland and that he used to tell people that those are stars

[@-_Nuke_-]

What makes me sad is that 99% of the people in the comments are blistering idiots compared to the genius of Lawrence Krauss. Anyway, it was an amazing lecture, Lawrence Krauss one of the best science lecturers I know for sure.

[@2fast2block]

Golly, you are a dumbass to say that about dumbass Krauss. Krauss, "The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life." Just past 18:00 here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bXrQp5-JbbV_f9E That's not based on science but only Krauss farting that out of his dumb ass. kzbin.info/www/bejne/sIaafaqtYth1hsk kzbin.info/www/bejne/qGXWgWR7Zq-Xlbs kzbin.info/www/bejne/j57NnaWta6yggbc kzbin.info/www/bejne/gmGQmZqJn9Oio6M kzbin.info/www/bejne/a3K7nKWZZ7SGqZY 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. kzbin.info/www/bejne/l3KQd5akgdh5Z8k kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZScgZSQr9ike8k 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. kzbin.info/www/bejne/i4WWlZmGhMl0j7c 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.

[@DutchmanAmsterdam]

@@2fast2block Hahahaha, You believe in god, and call others non-scientific dumbasses.....

[@DutchmanAmsterdam]

@@2fast2block Thanks for giving me a good laugh!

[@MrOohgaryneville]

mindblowing.

[@punnasamamao1307]

"Not only can something arise from nothing, but something will always arise from nothing.". Wow !

[@arturoalfaro7146]

Nothin can't produce anything period nothing more to say to open mind's 😊🌅🌈🤣🤣

[@twomicefighting]

So... In the event there was humans on earth so far into the future and the universe has expanded beyond anything being visible outside the Milky Way, will this cosmologists etc. have to take this on faith? Will scientists study the writings of today's geniuses like Krauss in the same way believers follow books that were written up to 2 or 3 thousand years ago?

[@chaotickreg7024]

What was your question? It would require faith if the observable universe got bigger? It's always getting bigger as more light gets to us.

[@TheAtlashead23]

Christopher Hitchens... his genius lives beyond the grave.

[@deestroyer1885]

I still believe in Thor

[@johnsmith9246]

Yes, Chris Hemsworth 🤪

[@travisfitzwater8093]

The two takeaways: you are far more insignificant than you thought; and, The Future is Miserable.

[@anialiandr]

Maybe teh universe did not evolve the way we think of evolution. This is how he in fact probmeatises his other great lecture on nothing. Respect goes long way.

[@richardnineteenfortyone7542]

It is good to know that I am not worrying about nothing.

[@danielhenderson7050]

Anyone else use this as sleep aid? I love it.

[@CCKsoldier]

If you're going to call someone an idiot, the least you can do is try to sound more intelligent than them. On second thought, the least you could do is nothing and that would be preferable.

[@TrevinoTrevino-wb4sq]

The theory of Gravity is simply that, a theory. Never proven or repeated. Wha, wha, what?!

[@EpicMRPancake]

Best mindf*ck ever

[@tnekkc]

I am in the multiverse where there are no other universes.

[@karlamay_]

Why, I feel so small and insignificant and fleeting...

[@FISHDINHO]

There is no time at the speed of light. It makes the whole universe nothing more than a synapsis firing. The universe is nothing more than a flicker of a thought. Still fun to play in though.

[@GUPTAYOGENDRA]

In order to understand how universe came from nothing, following procedure should be followed: 1. After waking from a dream, ask yourself the question: What was present in my dream which is also present in the universe? The answer to the above question is doubtlessly “I”. I was present in dream and I am also present in the universe. Since the body-mind of the dream is not present in the universe and also the body-mind of the universe was not present in my dream, hence it is clear that I who was present in my dream as well as in the universe is not body- mind. Ask from yourself another question: What am I other than body-mind? Don’t try to reply, the answer will come automatically as the experience of being conscious without body-mind.

[@charlestownsend9280]

But the dream is present in the universe, it's in your brain, just like how a word document on a computer is present in the universe, it isn't physical but it is still in the universe.

[@jbalzey]

Again, a brilliant speech on how it all works. Mr. Krauss, What about why it and all exists. The world would benefit more from why things happen or exist, then how! Before you propose that this is all accidental, you may need to ask a fundamental question: 1) Why....

[@ChrisLee-yr7tz]

Why?

[@scenFor109]

Seams like the universe is a teleportation device. It reproduces something into nothing.

[@mariochavezjr2432]

A BLACK HOLE IS THE DOOR !!!! TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE COME FROM..

[@grinfacelaxu]

nice

[@kantraxoikol6914]

however we have galaxies moving toward us also, which kind of proves that we ARENT the center

[@Marzy5821]

depends how many days holiday you have per year, and who your mother in law is. or 42

[@travisfitzwater8093]

I would expext these micro-objects to be smarter than to traject in any way requiring too much travel through the center of the earth. I mean, if you can travel at 99.99967% the speed of light, what trouble would it be to fly a big enough triangle to get from anywhere to anywhere else beyond the topology of anything, especially when that something else is a solid containing tons or argon plasmas or whatever: designed to trap you.

[@MaDrung]

We're not debating what you'd rather believe here. But firstly... you don't know it's nothing. There prolly is a lot behind it that we can't interact with.

[@meghanline300]

In the 10 years since this was uploaded, he’s mentioned at least 2 things that have happened. The detections of gravitational waves and James Webb telescope.

[@nosnurb1972]

Higgs boson?

[@AceOfSpadesX]

The James Webb telescope project began in 1996. Gravitational waves were first proposed in the late 1800s

[@axel-fh1ru]

@@AceOfSpadesX exactly

[@bigdickpornsuperstar]

So, creationists..... a universe from nothing is impossible, but a god from nothing who creates a universe from nothing is perfectly plausible? Basically you're saying religion is belief in a middle man... a stage magician who pulls universes out of a hat. ::facepalm::

[@gusolsthoorn1002]

Creationists do not believe God came from nothing but is eternal. He has no beginning and no end. Thus we have an adequate cause. Nothing is not an adequate cause.

[@gusolsthoorn1002]

@Dd S An eternal personal God, who is separate and outside of space and time , assuming such a being exists, would be able to create the universe. Thus He is an adequate cause. "Nothing", assuming that nothing is not any thing, by definition is not an adequate cause, and thus could not create anything. This is known as the Kalam Cosmological argument. It's most popular defender is Dr. William Lane Craig. He is a brilliant philosopher even though I disagree with him on his take on origins. He is one Ph.D student's defense of it. irl.umsl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1186&context=thesis

[@charlestownsend9280]

That sums up religion.

[@capecarver]

Logical fallacy. ::facepalm::

[@czanel4899]

i am watching it march 05 posted march 06. Who says time travel is not possible?.

[@thetruthaboutscienceandgod6921]

Please share my two brief videos with other people. Thank you.

[@ronburgandy5006]

Fucking brilliant!....all this info, facts, etc, yet some will dismiss it and keep drinking their Kool-Aid.

[@250txc]

I gotta say, Mr Krauss is quite a lecturer. Very entertaining and very informative and funny.

[@TrevinoTrevino-wb4sq]

He can't escape the probabilities. That's why he never dare mention them.

[@grindupBaker]

@Podimann It's his accent. That's definitely the reason why I don't understand him.

[@janchilton]

I love him even more for his politics. 🙂

[@detroitboy65]

Hate to disappoint you Prof. Krauss but most cameras still have built-in light meters.

[@DavisSavage]

17:37

[@Aluminata]

The reason for Einstein's great regret was that he had been caught in the act of making stuff up as he went along.

[@schmetterling4477]

What stuff did he make up? Be precise now.

[@Aluminata]

@@schmetterling4477 Lambda. Cosmological constant he invented to account for a static universe - which he later realized it was not.

[@travisfitzwater8093]

Did you know that a microwave won't kill an ant? For real.

[@Sharperthanu1]

Call me "insignificant" but I'm sitting here watching and understanding this lecture and my cat is not.As smart as he is.

[@GoCanucks2011]

Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.

[@Osiris1080]

He looks like Dr. Steven Grier's brother, Peen Grier.

[@TheBoogieman2001]

he looks a bit like roberto benigni

[@robertmcclintock8701]

If universe is social it's certain to produce a God.

[@donnakuhl2419]

Who or what created some thing from NO thing?

[@schmetterling4477]

I have never seen "no thing". The least stuff that I have ever seen is called "physical vacuum" and it's choke full with fields.

[@charlestownsend9280]

Did you not watch the video?

[@travisfitzwater8093]

Neutrinos?

[@LindaStevensBZ]

I ALWAYS chuckle between minute 50 and 51. Is it just me?

[@spamnegg.1798]

LindaStevensBZ You can get meds for that, it must be tiresome.

[@robertmcclintock8701]

Oaths end with so help me God. God does reveal himself to people but only if he can be perfectly moral about it.

[@ChrisLee-yr7tz]

You what?

[@wardelllindsay8677]

"DARK MATTER" = cP Energy W=[cp,cP] mass 405E51 kg Radius=300E24 m Energy =3645E67 J Time =1E18 s

[@isaacanderson9943]

Such a great speaker just needs to work on philosophy of religion .

[@BiddutMitra]

In introduction he saz "someone" wrote long ago.. well Quran saz God is expanding space. Quran saz "God makes out of nothing ".

[@robertmcclintock8701]

If you know evolution it just makes you a baby doctor. That is the intelligent design.

[@chrisdoumouras2482]

You can’t get something from nothing !

[@tomdurwan1]

Hate the way he says ummm after a silly joke

[@cazzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

Linda Magee True

[@-_Nuke_-]

Linda Magee Nobody cares

[@christinajardeleza4486]

mr nothing!!!

[@robertmcclintock8701]

If you love the universe the birds will make you mentally ill so you fight with the environment to make it intelligent. Your supposed to make the environment intelligent so no God needed. God has been liberated and he is fully capable of evolving himself without any help. God don't want your worship he just wants to get married. Royal weddings is most watched thing on television. We fixed the video and audio for best experience possible. Cameras are supernatural and all of them captured 3D. The audio loud don't make violence so has depth. Nobody has to buy anything for it to work.

[@nickb-whistler4431]

im glad you didnt understand a word he said

[@claudiosaltara7003]

Is God patiently listening to all these theories that try to explain is creation. Either He is mad or entertained by them.

[@schmetterling4477]

How can a non-existing being listen to science?

[@claudiosaltara7003]

Schmetter Ling: il bosone di Higgs non l’aveva visto nessuno eppure lo hanno teorizzato. Iddio e stato teorizzato e si è reso presente come il Big Bang. dal nulla. Pensando profondamente e’ la stessa cosa. Dal nulla e’. apparso come l’universo dopo il Big Bang. Ma non lo dire a nessuno dei tuoi compagni altrimenti ti lasceranno.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@claudiosaltara7003 Bullshit.

[@evfich]

Love you Larry but that blue background is the absolute worst.

[@chrisdoumouras2482]

You cannot get something from nothing

[@martylawrence5532]

Richard Dawkins calls the DNA's quaternary code a 'little bit' more complicated than the computer's binary code. A little bit? The DNA is much more complicated. It can be read backwards along with forward. It can work by offsetting a few frames [codons] and go forward or backward once again and make a different needed protein. The theory of evolution's proponents use this simplifying. It's misdirection by simplifying. At least he calls it a code that many of his students and cohorts will not do. He tries to simplify the self-arranging of the complexity of the DNA sequences as being 'saved' by natural selection. Natural selection must select something intelligent...an intelligence in which are mathematical impossibilities-by-chance. Natural selection does not save self-assembling biological codes. They do still have an intelligent design signature to them. These two talk like there is just one code involved in living cells. Not true. There are FIVE codes. There is the DNA code, the mtDNA code, the epigenome code, the lipid code of cell membranes, and the 'sugar code' that are on the surfaces of the cells. This more than a catch 22. It's a 'catch 55' needing to come together all at the same time for life to succeed. Again...natural selection can't save the theory of evolution with all of this complexity. What does natural selection select? It selects the epigenome's gene modifications without evolution's DNA mutation-engine. This again fits the intelligent design signature. The proteins are not simple either. They have to fold perfectly to make a needed product for life in the cell within a split second...or up to four seconds depending on the complexity. Manmade supercomputers TIED together takes WEEKS to duplicate the feat! This probably should be called the sixth code. I mentioned the epigenome code above. It is from this already built-in biological code that adaptations and trait passing comes from...passing for HUNDREDS of generations without DNA mutations being involved. Not credited to do so by evolutionary scientists until 2014. The epigenome works like a software program running overtop the DNA hardware program. See this catch 22 working along with the other three codes? Here is a cut and paste...and a link describing the epigenome. www.dictionary.com › browse › epigenomeEpigenome Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com Epigenome definition, a network of chemical compounds surrounding DNA that modify the genome without altering the DNA sequences and have a role in determining which genes are The epigenome's multi-generational adaptation and trait passing capability does not involve evolving of DNA sequences but is a biological system with standing-already-there capability. It takes cues from the environment such as new diets, new environments, and new threats and modifies into new things like the beak of the Darwin Finch or bacteria coming onto new antibiotic resistance. This new information is passed on in the female's eggs AND the male's seminal fluid that the sperm swims in. This newly 2014-credited epigenome's ability was miscalled as being 'evidence' for the ASSUMED EVOLVING OF DNA MUTATIONS miscalled 'microevolution'. All of the macroevolution schemes were built on these two miscalled precepts. The 'engine' for evolution is therefore missing 'under the hood'. Wrong precepts makes the evolution's concept impossible. Evolution's proposed way of evolving does not make it to first base. This makes macroevolution's home runs just a mind construct. You must run to first base to proceed to touch all the bases in your homerun trot. How does the epigenome software code work in conjunction with the DNA code? Let's do an analogy of a new built car. A new car has the same 'hardware' as a pre-1970 car of the engine, the pistons, and the drive shaft. Let's call that the 'DNA' of the two cars. In a high-end new car there are up to a hundred computers and a 150 computer chips. This we will call the 'epigenome' of the new high-end car. These feed information into the engine for precision of its workings. This is like how the epigenome-DNA relationship works in life. There you go! I give you science showing we are a creation. Your evolution scientists and academic mentors give you scientism. The Creator? Jesus Christ. Here is a 4 minute video describing the TRUE gospel... kzbin.info/www/bejne/jZmUh4hjlLR5b5o

[@erikhviid3189]

The 6 day creation fairytale. Noahs ark. Resurrection without any evidence (outside the Bible ). Grow up.

[@martylawrence5532]

@@lepidoptera9337 If you were God, could you talk thru a donkey or make the donkey talk? If you want to show atheism comes from rational thought then make rational 'refutations'.

[@tomasneel1980]

Krause doesn't believe in the Almighty but his narcism makes him think he's greater than God. e=mc2 unless your krause . then it means nothing to him like everything else that's sound science. Pls read the Book of Mormon about these mysteries The Lord has answered. best wishes

[@combinedeffects4799]

Caught up in the creation and shaking his fist at the Creator. Explaining what is already there and strutting like a peacock just shows the arrogance of the atheist mindset.

[@erikhviid3189]

You confuse 2 concepts. Atheist and physicist.

[@combinedeffects4799]

@@erikhviid3189 you are too confused to get the point .

[@erikhviid3189]

@@combinedeffects4799 all religions are incarnations of primitive and childish superstition. There are NO evidence for any god. All manmade concepts.

[@combinedeffects4799]

@@erikhviid3189 ha ha - speak for yourself - mr know it all - let DNA Create itself and bring itself into existence with atheist black magic .

[@erikhviid3189]

@@combinedeffects4799 DNA didn’t pop out of nothing. We - scientist - don’t know how (and when) the first DNA molecules evolved. Probably from RNA. And RNA probably from cross autocatalysis in f.ex. Molydenum oxide. No magic - just a billion years. But you prefer that an imaginary sky-daddy popped out of nowhere, snapped his fingers and “here we are” ! That’s childish.

[@vladimir0700]

Lawrence Kraut

[@-_Nuke_-]

Krauss*

[@christinajardeleza4486]

God is nothing and nothing comes from god and god comes from nothing, believe it or not

[@-_Nuke_-]

no

[@NephilimFree]

Claim: The material realm/universe is eternal. Response: The Laws of Nature, the Philosophy of Science, and expansion of the universe refute the claim because, 1. the universe is expanding, verified by the discover of the redshift 1, 2, 3 of star light. The universe cannot have been expanding eternally else the expansion of the universe would have created so much space between the Earth and stars that no star would be visible - star light could never reach the Earth. 2. if the universe existed eternally into the past, there would be no light or usable energy, and we could not be alive contemplating the universe. 3. the Law of Cause and Effect (aka Law of Causality) 1, 2, 3 demonstrates that the universe cannot be uncaused. It had a cause external to itself and therefore a beginning. 4. the Second Law of Thermodynamics verifies that the universe is experiencing entropy and thus had a beginning. 5. an eternal universe creates logical contradictions and would make all measures of time arbitrary. 6. an infinately large universe creates logical contradictions and would make all measures of space arbitrary. 7. the universe has a cause which is external to itself, and is necessarily non-physical. Claim: There can be an infinite number of prior physical causes. Therefore, the universe does not need to arise from nothing. Response: Matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed, they can only be converted. Without a continuous creation of new energy there cannot be an infinite number of prior physical causes. Because usable concentrations of energy currently exist, the Second Law of Thermodynamics verifies that physical reality cannot be eternally existing into the past. Claim: Scientific theories explain the origin of the universe without a supernatural cause. Response: The cause for the existence of the universe cannot be natural. It is necessarily supernatural because, 1. The Law of Cause and Effect (aka Law of Causality) 1, 2, 3 is demonstrably true. Therefore the universe has a cause and a beginning. 2. The material realm/universe is all of nature, and the cause of any physical thing is external to it. Therefore the material realm/universe cannot be it's own cause. It requires a cause that is external to nature and therefore supernatural. 3. The Second Law of Themodynamics demostrates that the material realm/universe is experiencing entropy 1, 2, 3 because it had a beginning. The material realm/universe is becomeing less ordered. The energy in the universe is being dispersed and would over enough time become so evenly distributed that no potential for work would be present in the universe. Had this process been occurring infinately into the past, there would be no light or heat in the universe, and life could not exist. 4. An infinite material realm/universe would create logical contradictions and make the measurement of time and space arbitrary. a. If the material realm/universe were physically infinite in size (space), there would be no place of physical origin from which to standardize measurements. b. If the material realm/universe were infinitely existing into the past, all measures of time would be arbitrary. c. Equations such as 1 millisecond x 2 = 1 year could neither be disproved or validated - i.e. How many years are there in half of an infinite number? d. If the material realm/universe were infinately large in size, all measures of distance would be arbitrary. e. Equations such as 1 millimeter x 2 = kilometer could neither be validated or disproved - i.e How many kilometers are there in half of an infinite number? f. We are able to measure time and space. Therefore, the material realm/universe has not existed eternally into the past and is not physically infinite in space. 5. The Law of Conservation of Energy 1, 2, 3, 4 demonstrates that the universe requires an external, non-physical cause. The total energy of an isolated system remains constant - it is conserved over time. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed (at least not by energy and matter, i.e. the universe itself), though it may be transformed from one form to another. a. All of whatever physically exists is nature, and cannot have been created by natural causes. Natural causes cannot have created nature. b. An external cause for the universe is therefore is necessary. c. Physics and the Philosophy of Science have shown that the universe had a supernatural cause since before the existence of the universe there was nothing, and nothing cannot cause anything. d. Therefore the cause of the universe is not physical, but is instead non-physical. e. If there ever had been a time when nothing physical existed, then there would be nothing physical now, because nothing cannot be causal. Therefore the cause of the universe cannot be nothing, nor is it anything physical, because it is not comprised of matter, energy, and time. The cause is therefore necessarily non-physical and by definition supernatural.

[@NephilimFree]

@Dd S Testable science does not employ speculations. Evolutionism does.

[@NephilimFree]

@Dd S So you say.

[@NephilimFree]

@Dd S I don't waste time debating in text. But if you think you've got something, you might like to try coming out of the dark and debating me about it. That's the only way people get serious attention from me. Let me know if you get the courage, knowledge of the subject, and motivation to do so. Otherwise, cya.

[@kunstsein]

tldnr

[@neelpd7214]

kunstsein @

[@-_Nuke_-]

fuck off then

[@mattmatt4916]

The Bible is a chain and ball if you take it literally.. The Bible can also be the instruction booklet that comes along with that new machine you refuse to read because your pride depends on your Ego raining always who needs no insight.

[@Spectre8750]

Actually no it isn't. Do you believe it is a ball and chain to treat your neighbor with kindness. Most of the Book is Prophecy, from beginning to end,. If you understood it, you wouldn't feel the same. I used to believe you had to be perfect to be a Christian but that isn't true.

[@bnipmnaa]

Do you stone unruly children to death?

[@capecarver]

Kraus is conceited enough to believe that he is authoring the instruction manual.

[@elijaguy]

Dear Kraus, permanently irritated by people enjoying religious and superstitious world-views. Obviously, it is not as fruitful in terms of technological flourishing of our world, however it makes life mentally possible or at least easier for many people who anyways dont depend on a scientific world view for their contribution to society, which may even be meaningful, and find some consolation in non-realistic fairy tales to counter the burden of a clear knowledge of reality, which may be intolerably depressing. .

[@greekpanther1]

Enough, you are making a fool of your self.

[@IsaacsTM]

Good presentation but he is unnecessarily condescending and occasionally elitist.

[@cosmological_yat23]

@@lepidoptera9337 haha you got that

[@honestengineer9]

Let's pretend that your bathtub is empty space(pretending that it goes on forever)-&we add salt to the water-which dissolves-so we won't be able to see it-&pretend that this dissolved salt is this'mysterious dark matter'.So no visible mass yet-&then we alter the temp of the water such that the salt will want to come out of solution-it will then come out of solution from throughout that whole bathtub-&settle@the bottom nearly uniformly-&NOTcreate1dense ball of precipitate2explode in2 the universe

[@greekpanther1]

sorry but watching videos on "allah" is not learning; it is in fact learning to stay ignorant.