Krauss does a great job of summarizing the current state of physics and helping the reader put it all into context

The book suggests some novel ways, at least to the layman, of conceptualizing the makeup of the universe that I hadn't heard before. Krauss does a great job of helping reframe ones thoughts about such common conceptualizations of nothingness that may have previously been based on non-scientific assumptions.

Having the author read his own book is generally a positive, and it was definitely the case here.

No.

Recommend to anyone who likes ideas that stretch the limits of comprehension. That is not to say that his wording is difficult nor that the narrator isn't very good - only that the subject matter is outside of what we "see" in our workaday world. Anyone who likes to read about physics, particularly quantum physics has more or less gotten used to this feeling. And if you have never read a non fiction mind stretcher - this might be a good one to try. Facts can indeed be stranger than fiction!

This is a great audio book and I always love when the material is actually read by the author. Dr. Krauss is brilliant and the material contained within is solid science based upon what we currently know about the universe.

If you're relaively new to the subject, I recommend this book. It's not necessarily introductory material but if you have a beginning understaning of modern physics in terms of astrophysics, relativity, and quantum theory, you will enjoy this book and the next steps you take with it. I'd probably recommend reading one of Brian Greene's books first to have a solid foundation.

If you've actually read many of the existing books on modern physics that are out there and seen Dr. Krauss' original presentation on this same subject, then this book adds little to the discussion. It puts it together in a nice package but it won't add much to your overall knowledge on the subject.

Again, I enjoyed listening to this book and would recommend it to friends.

The Author, while claiming to be focused on science for the sake of science spends way too much time trying to convince everybody that god does not exist. When I buy I science book, I want a science book. When I buy a theological book, I want a theological book. The author is so insistent on proving there is no god that he almost sounds like an extremely religious person who is trying to make you believe in god. I would argue that the author while consistently saying he has no faith in religion, is treating science as if it is a religion.

Sometimes I would think while listening to the book "come on, get on with the science" I've had enough of this lame discussion on how he has mathematically proven God does not exist. Also, what he fails to understand in his constant battering criticism of religion is that some religions have actively encouraged the seeking of knowledge and the study of science. As a Muslim, I know that my religion encourages me to learn and study. Religion is something we accept based purely on faith. I don't need mathematical proof that God exists. Science is based on math, observation and analytical thinking, I compartmentalize the two and have no issues with believing in both.

If the two conflict, not a big deal, chances are there is something I have misinterpreted from either the science side or the religion side. If the the conflict is extreme, I don't give myself a headache about it. Science has done good things to my life and religion has done good things to my life, I don't feel compelled to go around actively trying to discredit one or the other. For someone who does not believe in God, I would consider the lengths to which this author has gone in an attempt to prove this idea almost like an act of desperation. His arguments had the same tone, pitch and fervor of some of the extremely religious guys I've met who are trying to sell me their way of life as the only way that makes sense.. So, dear author, tone it down a bit and focus on the science next time.

Yes, Mr. Kraus is informed and endeavoring to answer the larger questions that still remain in cosmology.

A professional reader would have been a better choice to read his book. I also thought that the verbal jabs he makes at those whose belief system is different than his were unnecessary.

Pronunciation was, at times, difficult and hard to distinguish. A fine mind does not always equate to a good reader.

Mostly, though it still leaves open the question of whether the universe really did come from nothing.

Mr. Kraus begins with the universe already in some primordial state of existence some time after the Big Bang. His premise is sound in that because empty space has weight, it must also have energy. He therefore posits that it is plausible to conclude that this energy can be the primary or beginning cause for how the rest of the universe came into existence.

The problem lies in where Mr Kraus begins his journey which is sometime after the Big Bang. The book still leaves the larger question unanswered. That question is, what if anything, existed prior to the Big Bang? If it was absolute nothingness, how could something come from a complete state of absolute nothingness?

Mr Kraus begins with empty space which is a state of relative nothingness. There is a very significant difference between relative nothingness and absolute nothingness.

Probaby

See below.

Author Krause needs to be more careful distinguishing what is science and what is merely the hope or speculations of scientists. He is so desperate to eliminate any basis for religion in the universe that he overlooks those things that are supported only by his "faith" in science and not by science itself. His "what ifs" and "perhaps" thoughts are reminiscent of the show Ancient Aliens, not real science.

Only by rejecting the tools and methodology of religion ( e.g., personal faith and revelation) can he conclude there is no support for God in creation. If we rule out the tools of science in the same way (e.g. mathematics) we can conclude there is no support of science in creation. We need an approach that recognizes everyone's tools.

No.

Learned some things I didn't know and learned some things I didn't know and learned some things I didn't know.

Probably not. Difficult subjects are often better assimilated through text.

A good review and discussion of the something from nothing theory of the big bang and the universes' evolution. As scales get smaller and smaller the concept of nothingness becomes harder to apply to space.

nothing to add

no book meets that criterion for me.

not for the scientific illiterate. Ok for the layman who has a basic grasp of the creation and evolution of the universe.

The book's title and introduction are unrelated to the book's content, which itself is just a rehash of biographical and historical facts about cosmology as a science. Except for the book's title and introduction, the question of "a universe from nothing" or "something from nothing" is a question that is not even addressed, much less answered.

Call if fraud because fraud is what it is, whenever the title and introduction of any book intentionally use marketing deception to induce a person to buy a book that they would otherwise find useless.

Have read a number of books on this topic and even though there was some good and new information, listening to this author was difficult. He tries to impress you with his vocabulary and makes sure you know of all his accomplishments. Ho could take some lessons from David Wilcock.