Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum The beginning: where is it ?

After looking at some of the problems involved in trying to understand the origin of the Universe, Paul Davies (State of the Universe. New Scientist Supplement. 09.10.2004. Davies. Paul, When Time Began.) says:

“In spite of these technical obstacles, one may say quite generally that once space and time are made subject to quantum principles, the possibility immediately arises of space and time ‘switching on’, or popping into existence without the need for prior causation, entirely in accordance with the laws of quantum physics.”

The “nit-picker” within refuses to remain subdued and bursts out with a loud cry of “But!”. It is reasonably easy to see how the laws of quantum physics can be applied to the spontaneous decay of a uranium atom (as Davies had done earlier). The uranium already existed, so did the laws of quantum physics, therefore the laws could be applied to the uranium atom without any problem. The same cannot be said of the Universe, that, according to this theory, did not exist before the laws of quantum mechanics were applied to it; nothing (except, presumably, the laws of quantum mechanics), existed, so these laws would have had to be applied to “nothing”. It might be argued that this can be achieved if we take, for example, the concept of quantum uncertainty. If we try to apply uncertainty to nothing, what happens? Surely the only uncertainty that can be applied to nothing is that it might be “something”. One assumes that that is the way the argument goes.

First there was nothing, but according to the laws of quantum mechanics we cannot be sure that it was nothing, therefore it could have been something. If nothing became something, then that something could have been the infant Universe. Once uncertainty has turned nothing into something, that something is “real” and we can dispense with uncertainty. Does anyone feel that the ring of familiarity here is due to the fact that we treated God in much the same way? Seriously though, I have a bit of a problem with applying quantum mechanics in a situation in which there is absolutely nothing, because in such a situation, there would, surely, be no quantum mechanics to be applied, and therefore no uncertainty to apply to that “nothing”; unless, that is, we regard quantum mechanics as having some abstract “eternity”, in which case we would be taking it out of space and time and making it “supernatural”.