• FooBarrington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    That explanation also kind of got to him, because it really is all around us that things don’t just pop into existence, ever.

    But they do! Not a classical scale, but on the quantum scale this literally happens all the time.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Hmm, I’m no expert, but I think I looked into this a while ago and it turned out to be pop-sci misinformation. What I’m finding from looking this up right now seems to confirm that it’s not actual empty space, but rather space with electro-magnetic fields or in a “false vacuum”, whatever that is precisely. If you happen to know a specific keyword for this phenomenon, though, I’d look into it some more.

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Hmm, but that seems to be again that there’s actually fields there, rather than proper nothing. At the very least, I would still say that the universe already existed before the Big Bang, if there was fields spanning all over the place and they just needed quantum fluctuation to turn into something you can touch. Especially, because “touch” is still just an interaction with a field.

          And I’m not trying to say that the phenomenon itself is pop-sci misinformation, but rather how it’s portrayed. They’ll write a title like “How Quantum Fluctuation Creates Something from Nothing”, which is technically something you could say, because “nothing” doesn’t have a sharp definition. But it’s also misleading as people will not think that “nothing” could also mean that there is actually still fields there. Instead, they will interpret it as proper nothing. And pop-sci journalists do that, because it brings in clicks, unfortunately.