A Universe from Nothing - Reflection on the Book

A Universe from Nothing - by Lawrence Krauss

 

This book is wonderful. Very well written. Though deeply founded in science - its depth difficult to fully comprehend - it is written in an easy style, so that the conclusions can be well understood.

It concludes that (1) Universe had a beginning (2) It is Flat (3) It has Dark Matter and Dark Energy (99% of the Universe) that we cannot see, but conclude its existence through its effects. That we have emerged from Quantum Nothingness. Nothingness has energy, but lacks matter - a "mystery", as he calls it. Quantum fluctuations at the beginning of time created what we can see (something) from this nothingness.

All of this once and for all ridicules the idea of a creator and a creation (6,000 years ago, or otherwise). This has been the basis of many religions. So, religion is discarded. And, along with it, the idea of God.

He is emphatic about the "mystery". {The origin and nature of dark energy is without a doubt the biggest mystery in fundamental physics today. It is natural to suspect that its nature is tied in some basic way to the origin of the universe. And all signs suggest that it will determine the future of the universe as well. (last para in Chapter 5)}

His conclusions are very similar to the Vedantic view of the cosmos, which states the existence of only "one" (you might call it "energy"). What we see are manifestations of the same. Vedantic view of the cosmos is that of the "mystery" (પરોક્ષ; also labeled as પુરુષ ) and its "manifestation" (પ્રત્યક્ષ; also labeled as પ્રકૃતિ ). Hence, it is the process of "emanation", where the same reality (or energy) "changes its form". {...our universe arose through a process like that of inflation, a process whereby the energy of empty space (nothing) gets converted into the energy of something....(last page in Chapter 9)}

In other words, Nature (પ્રકૃતિ) is the manifestation of the same energy that we may not see (પુરુષ ). Hence, it is the "Nature" that is revered and worshiped. In Vedanta, God is "Nature". As a result, Hindus worship all forms of Nature (Rivers, Mountains. Trees, Cows....you name it) as God. Lawrence Krauss makes a compelling argument to support this view. The behavior of "nature" is not governed by a God, but by a set of rules (discovered by Science), like Gravity, Relativity, etc. At a cosmic level, this is all pre-ordained (by these laws - not by God), so one cannot affect its course (per Krauss). But, at human level, we can affect it significantly by our thoughts, words and deeds (per Vedanta & Gita).

[To be complete, God is viewed and worshiped in both of its aspects: Mystery and Manifestation - પુરુષ and પ્રકૃતિ. The generic name for the "one" (combined) view is "સત્ય" (Universal Order) and specific name given to it in Vedanta is "બ્રહ્મન"]

On a different front, Krauss has himself wondered what caused the beginning and what was there (if anything) before the beginning (13.72 billion years ago). Vedanta says that "one" (energy) is eternal - it just changes its form. Implication: 13.72 billion years ago, it changed its form. So, the Universe as we know it had a beginning, but that energy (or "nothing") had no beginning nor will it end.

We are so lucky to have science (ancient sages would have loved it). Science has been such a great means to prove (or disprove) the Vedantic view of the world. The contention between Science and Religion arose because of the idiotic views of many religions (including those practicing Hinduism) that somehow God created the world at some point in time. Among the Hindus, use of metaphors have significantly distorted its fundamental belief. Those who understand the fact that metaphors are only what they are - describing the original reality in a poetic and understandable way - are accepting of it (I put myself in that category). While vast majority view them as the actual truth - that is when the original truth is distorted, the idea of God is distorted. Worse yet, the atheists accept them as the original truth as propounded by the religion (because that is what they see everybody practicing), and hence are repulsed by it - not knowing that the truth lies elsewhere.

There is a huge gap between Science and most religions (as they are practiced) - especially the creationist theories. However, I continue to be amazed that Science and Vedanta are so complementary. The reason I was attracted to Vedanta was because I felt it could have been founded in Science, while it also bridged the gap between the Mind and the Heart.