Fitz

Only happens on Yahoo News, everyone else can comment, it's just my account, and on multiple computers. Anyone know how to resolve this? I can no longer comment.

I've asked this before and haven't gotten an answer. I've emailed askaphysicist, NASA, Hayden Planetarium, etc and gotten no reply.

If the universe spawned from a quantum fluctuation, and required a gravitational field to provide negative energy to accomplish the needed zero net energy, where did the gravitational field come from in the absence of space time and mass to warp it?

I've asked this before and haven't gotten an answer. I've emailed askaphysicist, NASA, Hayden Planetarium, etc and gotten no reply.

If the universe spawned from a quantum fluctuation, and required a gravitational field to provide negative energy to accomplish the needed zero net energy, where did the gravitational field come from in the absence of space time and mass to warp it?

This isn’t really an argument for evolution, I’m just curious about the view of those that do not believe in it in regards to one of its aspects. I would like to know what the opposing opinion is in regards to this information.

According to evolution, we can see from fossil records the progression of change from one species of “human” (meaning the homo genus) to another, eventually leading to us. I was curious as to what explanation those that do not believe have regarding it.

Homo Habilis: Ape-like “human”.

Homo Gautengensis: Less ape-like.

Homo Rudolfensis: A little less ape-like

Homo Ergaster: Even less ape-like

Homo Erectus: Even less ape-like.

Homo-Cepranesis: Looking even less like an ape.

Homo Antecessor: Looking vaguely like us

Homo Heidelbergensis: A bit more like us

Homo Rhodesiensis: Even more like us

Homo Neanderthalensis: Very similar to us.

Homo Denisovans: Almost exactly like us

Homo Sapiens: Us.

Considering the changes in the various species that occurred progressively through time, from ape-like creatures to creatures that are more and more similar to us, until we end off with homo sapiens (us). I’m just wondering what explanation or reason there is for this if we assume evolution did not happen. Again, I’m not trying to convince here, I’m truly interested in the opposite view of mine regarding this information.

I have asked this question before, and got an answer that satisfied me (at least it did then), however, since then MANY famous scientists disagree with the reasoning of the answer making me think that I'm missing something.

Many scientists including Hawking, Krauss, etc contend that universe came to be through a quantum fluctuation event. Now I'm not a physicist but from what I understand, in order for a quantum fluctuation of this energy magnitude to persist, it requires the total energy content of the universe to equal zero under this premise:

A gravitational field has negative energy. Matter has positive energy. The two values cancel out provided the universe is completely flat.

Okay if that's the case, then the only possible source of the negative energy is a gravitational field. How do we get a gravitational field without the universe already existing in some form? As I said I asked this once before, and was told by a physicist that quantum fluctuations could NOT explain the origin of our universe. Yet Hawking, Krauss, etc persist in the idea that they can.

Can anybody shed some light on this in layman's terms?

I have asked this question before, and got an answer that satisfied me (at least it did then), however, since then MANY famous scientists disagree with the reasoning of the answer making me think that I'm missing something.

Many scientists including Hawking, Krauss, etc contend that universe came to be through a quantum fluctuation event. Now I'm not a physicist but from what I understand, in order for a quantum fluctuation of this energy magnitude to persist, it requires the total energy content of the universe to equal zero under this premise:

A gravitational field has negative energy. Matter has positive energy. The two values cancel out provided the universe is completely flat.

Okay if that's the case, then the only possible source of the negative energy is a gravitational field. How do we get a gravitational field without the universe already existing in some form? As I said I asked this once before, and was told by a physicist that quantum fluctuations could NOT explain the origin of our universe. Yet Hawking, Krauss, etc persist in the idea that they can.

Can anybody shed some light on this in layman's terms?

Scared of a little criticism? Hee hee. Coward. I guess seeking is better than hearing.

If you look at the how long I've been on Y!A you'll see I've hardly asked anything (8 questions, and almost 10,000 answers), and even less has been the number of times (only three times including this) that I've used it as a stage. But I've been profoundly touched by a video about our place in the universe.

Whether you be a theist or atheist, it's a humbling thought and I think we can all agree (unless you're a fundamentalist or YECreationist) that it's something that binds us all together regardless of our beliefs. There are some things we all share regardless of where they come from. Someday we will all hopefully accept each other for what we are without the need to dislike or distrust each other for it.

So I wanted to share, and hear your thoughts.

Have a fantastic day, and may the wind be always at your back, and the sunshine be always on your face. Well wishes to everyone.

Here's the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05GcY9fKw%E2%80%A6

WELL DON'T

If you look at the how long I've been on Y!A you'll see I've hardly asked anything, and even less has been the number of times (only once) that I've used it as a stage. But I've been profoundly touched by a few videos about our place in the cosmos, and though most of you have already seen them, I wish to share them with those that haven't.

Please watch these and re-evalutate the wonder of the universe as we know it. To paraphrase Tyson, it's time we started dreaming again:

The most astounding fact:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM1agzRdR%E2%80%A6

We stopped dreaming 1:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIZU8cQW%E2%80%A6

We stopped dreaming 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFO2usVjf%E2%80%A6

Since you blocked me I can't answer, but the origin of matter is the result of energy particle collisions in the early universe. Not only is this known, but it can be demonstrated in any particle collider. Not a mystery in any way.

His last question was "Do you think it's ironic that the Haters of God come in here to hate, but they can't handle criticizm?"

Yet he's blocked all of us from answering. Seems to me that it's not us that can't handle criticism.

I have read "The Grand Design" by Hawking and "A Universe From Nothing" by Krauss and I am fascinated by the concept of the universe being the result of a quantum fluctuation event, but I am confused about something.

If I am getting this right, nothingness is unstable. When we apply gravity, we have the potential for positive and negative energy fields with a net value of zero which allows something to come from nothing. But where is the gravity coming from? I thought gravity was the bi-product of mass warping spacetime. Wouldn't that mean that we would already need to have both spacetime and mass in order to get the gravity in the first place?

I have read "The Grand Design" by Hawking and "A Universe From Nothing" by Krauss and I am fascinated by the concept of the universe being the result of a quantum fluctuation event, but I am confused about something.

If I am getting this right, nothingness is unstable. When we apply gravity, we have the potential for positive and negative energy fields with a net value of zero which allows something to come from nothing. But where is the gravity coming from? I thought gravity was the bi-product of mass warping spacetime. Wouldn't that mean that we would already need to have both spacetime and mass in order to get the gravity in the first place?

I was under the impression that quantum fluctuations present the possibility of something coming from nothing. So in regards to the big bang, my question is this: Did the quantum fluctuation bring about the existence of the singularity that expanded (the big bang)? Or did the singularity already exist, and some attribute of a quantum fluctuation cause the singularity to expand?

I'm no physicist, so if someone could give me a laymen answer here's my question:

I was under the impression that quantum fluctuations present the possibility of something coming from nothing. So in regards to the big bang, my question is this: Did the quantum fluctuation bring about the existence of the singularity that expanded (the big bang)? Or did the singularity already exist, and some attribute of a quantum fluctuation cause the singularity to expand?

Okay so I know there's an answer for this, but no one I've run across knows what it is so I'm going to defer to the top contributors' wisdom. For the sake of argument let's say time travel is already possible. If there is a proportioanl amount of matter and energy in the universe, and you traveled to the future, wouldn't you be removing matter (and not converting it into energy) from your timeline and upsetting that balance? What effect would that have (if any)? And if it would have no effect, why not?