Where did the universe come from? What was there before it? What will the future bring? And finally, why is there something rather than nothing?
Krauss’ answers to these and other timeless questions, in a wildly popular lecture on YouTube, has attracted almost a million viewers. The last of these questions in particular has been at the center of religious and philosophical debates about the existence of God, and it’s the supposed counterargument to anyone who questions the need for God. Scientists have, however, historically focused on more pressing issues—such as figuring out how the universe actually functions, which could help us to improve our quality of life.
In this cosmological story that rivets as it enlightens, pioneering theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss explains groundbreaking scientific advances that turn the most basic philosophical questions on their head. One of the few prominent scientists to have actively crossed the chasm between science and popular culture, Krauss reveals that modern science is indeed addressing the question of why there is something rather than nothing—with surprising and fascinating results. The beautiful experimental observations and mind-bending theories are all described accessibly, and they suggest that not only can something arise from nothing, something will always arise from nothing.
With his characteristic wry humor and clear explanations, Krauss takes us back to the beginning of the beginning, presenting recent evidence for how our universe evolved—and the implications for how it will end. It will provoke, challenge, and delight listeners as it looks at the most basic underpinnings of existence in a whole new way. And this knowledge that our universe will be quite different in the future has profound consequences and directly affects how we live in the present. As Richard Dawkins described it, this could potentially be the most important scientific book with implications for supernaturalism since Darwin.
©2012 Lawrence M. Krauss (P)2012 Blackstone Audio, Inc.
“Nothing is not nothing. Nothing is something. That’s how a cosmos can be spawned from the void—a profound idea conveyed in A Universe from Nothing that unsettles some yet enlightens others. Meanwhile, it’s just another day on the job for physicist Lawrence Krauss.” (Neil deGrasse Tyson, astrophysicist, American Museum of Natural History)
I loved the science. "Nothing is unstable!"
There are no spoiler here. The ending is just more of the science.
It is always nice to hear the author tell their own strory
The authors constant need to talk about god moved me to dislike the book. I don't think that science is about whether god exists or not.
His whining about religion and why God doesn't need to exist. Who cares? Just give us the science and theories about how the universe formed. If he had done that the book would have been enjoyable. I got really tired of him trying to convince me why I should stop believing in God, and telling me how much religion has derailed science.
Full House: The Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin by Stephen Jay Gould.
Voices and pace were okay.
Does not apply.
Learn, understand, then decide whether you accept or reject.
If you want to hear someone glorify Richard Dawkins, get this book. Otherwise, find something more informative than this junk.
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.
Haven't read the print version. I learn from this type of book better by listening. Lawrence Krauss is one of my favorite physicists, and he delivers in this book. He takes a tangled subject and unwinds it with passion and fervor.
The story of nothingness, or how we came to be.
Audible needs to format reviews for the book type. Not all books are works of fiction with characters.
I really liked the way this book brought together all of the relevant theories of physics to explain how our universe was created. It was technical in parts, but overall was simple enough to understand.
It was exhausting though, to hear the author's constant trumpeting of his accomplishments and predicitions. His rantings against religion also became tiresome. While sympathetic to his point, I felt this issue was addressed SO MANY times throughout the book, it almost became its main point.
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.
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.
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.
Probably not. The narration is very good, but the author seems to spend a lot of energy ridiculing those who may believe in God. I was not looking for a book to challenge theism, but one which would explain how the universe could appear from nothing.
Stay focused on the science and physics. Avoid religion.
I would have returned the book, but waited too long to listen to it and missed the one year cut off.
Report Inappropriate Content