How something can come from nothing

[Soleron]

Jay520 said:

Soleron said:
I favour the idea that 'nothing' is a sea of random spontaneous energy. Sometimes, given enough time, a universe forms. Sometimes a universe is destroyed. This is the simplest and most natural extension of what we already know about vacuum. The universe's laws and so on are actually unique to it and a property of its formation rather than universal truth.

Your conception of 'nothing' as truly empty and uneventful is a human thing and at odds with quantum mechanics.

I don't want to make any assertions on what 'nothing' is. just used the concept of 'nothing' that almost everyone thinks of when thinking of "before the universe."

Changed "your" to "the", wasn't against you.

While I agree we can't know anything about before the universe right now directly, that doesn't mean that all ideas are equally valid. We can still use logic and our local experience of the world to say what might happen. And nowhere in the world do we see the kind of true nothingness that people think of. Why would it be the default assumption when we're talking about before the universe?

If you're willing to throw out the "something can't come from nothing" idea, why not the "all things must have a beginning" idea? The universe could have existed forever in some form forever (oscillation Big Bangs and Crunches, or an interconnected multiverse spawning baby universes).

Our default ideas are limited by the space we think we inhabit: flat, three-dimensional, deterministic, and on a large scale compared to the atom. They're not a good guide to how the universe actually operates on very large or very small scales.