I am with you that generally Krauss does a good job of popularizations of cosmology and so on. He is generally quite careful and accurate in his book "A Universe from Nothing", except on page 166, where he says "There is one universe in which the total energy is definitely and precisely zero.... It is a closed universe..." This is just simply incorrect. The total mass energy of a closed universe is not definable because there is no reference point outside such a universe from which one can measure the total enclosed energy. Krauss's argument by analogy with the total charge in the universe fails because he appears to have overlooked the simple fact that in a closed universe, light cannot go right round and back to the starting point before the universe re-contracts to zero size. This is a simple GR calculation in the geometry of a closed universe. See the text by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler (MTW, the 'Bible' of general relativists!)

Bruce




spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:

Sent from AOL Mobile Mail

I like Larry Krauss despite his attacks on Frank Tipler, because Larry Krauss also concedes the possibility of faster than light travel. No which among us, are going to turn down Star Trek?

From: meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>

Bruce is a very good physicist and he's right. John Baez has a good discussion of the point on his blog.

Brent

On 10/25/2014 7:51 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:

    I find this quite surprising too and wonder if Brent could weigh in
    as I'm out of my league on that stuff.

    Terren

    On Oct 25, 2014 12:23 AM, "Peter Sas" < peterjacco...@gmail.com
    <mailto:peterjacco...@gmail.com>> wrote:

        Wow... That's quite shocking! I see I have to be much more
careful in taking over what the pop science writers say...
        Unfortunately, physics is a subject where the text books tend to
        carry

            more weight than the popular presentations. The text books
            show that the
            claims about the zero net energy of the universe made by
            people such as
            Hawking and Krauss in popular presentations are wrong. The
            interesting
            question is why undoubtedly clever people such as Krauss and
            Hawking
            would make such fallacious claims. I suppose simplification can
            sometimes be indistinguishable from over-simplification --
            or else
            people become more susceptible to brain farts as they get
            older.....

            Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to