In a recent attempt to understand how conventional physics “explains” reality, I began to read Lawrence Krauss’ A Universe from Nothing
Krauss is one of those famous scientists like Richard Dawkins who doesn’t find anything strange about the fact that existence IS.
Instead he takes EVERYTHING for granted and attacks, like Dawkins and Bill Maher, the low hanging fruit of organized religion and its dogmatic, unproven Gods created in our image.
When I tried reading his book I got a bit frustrated and then checked the index for the word “consciousness,” and when I did not find it, I put the book aside.
The question really is — “what” exactly is “nothing”?
First and foremost it is a concept. Nothing does not exist. What exists is, well, everything.
Nothing is the word or placeholder we use for null — similar to zero in math — but in both cases (words and math) they are human abstractions or interpretations of Nature. As such they are a step removed from reality and flawed by the limitations of our own perceptions and consciousness — a fact that escapes many modern physicists but which was in fact apparent to great thinkers like Einstein and Schrodinger.
As I’ve noted, we can use the concept “infinitely large” to “understand” the truth about — and yet, for example, while we know what a prime number is, and we know that there must ALWAYS be one larger, we are incapable of going to the “next” larger prime without — now — a supercomputer. We can’t identify the greatest prime, but we can inadequately describe it as “infinite,” and as soon as we do we know that, yes, there must be another.
How he finds geometry within a vacuum, or what science deems to be “nothing,” is similar in my view to finding code (DNA) running in our cells.