Nihil ex nihilo: A Universe out of Nothing

Kevin Bi Massachusetts Academy of Math and Science How can something come from nothing? How could our universe (in all of its grandeur and complexity) have popped into existence out of absolute emptiness? These are the big questions, inquiries that entail a frame of thought so elusive, so inconceivable, that the answers produced often seem to be outside the realm of believability. In the past, explanations have descended into the realm of the philosophical and the speculatively metaphysical (both being completely devoid of science). Thinkers of the past had (until recently) reached the consensus that such epistemology could not possibly be subjected to the investigative constraints of scientific exploration. Rather, the scientifically inarticulate have always believed that speculation about the origin of the universe would forever be restricted to the un-parsimonious, to the religious, and to the metaphysically un-quantifiable. But no longer does this need to be the case, as recent advancements in exploratory cosmology and in our understanding of quantum mechanics have shed light on possibilities for a naturalistic first cause or prime mover. Indeed, profoundly illuminating discoveries about the shape of our universe, the spontaneity of quantum fluctuation, and the nature of nothingness are slowly guiding us away from speculation and towards wondrous understanding. How do we characterize the spatial geometry of our universe? This is a question that is indelibly intertwined with that of the beginnings of the universe, and one that is immensely enlightening in the profundity of its implications. Certainly, understanding the shape of our plane of existence can help us conceptualize the means by which such existence could have come into being, while simultaneously revealing to us its ultimate fate. Einsteins theory of general relativity tells us that the very fabric of space is curved, which leaves physicists with only three potential universal geometries to consider (Preuss, 2002). In their most basic descriptive forms, these three species of universes are open, closed, and flat, only the latter of which is directly substantiated by observable evidence. Much of what we know about the spatial orientation and structure of our universe comes from the WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe), an orbiting satellite commissioned by NASA. By measuring the cosmic background radiation of distant space, WMAP allows cosmologists to effectively discern the shape of the universe and measure the curvature of space. Theoretically, open and closed universes would produce microwave background fluctuations of 0.5 and 1.5 degrees in diameter, respectively; in a flat universe, however, each of these radiation spots can be theoretically approximated to be one degree across. And what astronomers find is that the very brightest of the observable microwave fluctuations in our universe are infinitesimally close to 1 degree in diameter. Therefore, we know the universe to be spatially flat within less than a 2% margin of error (Griswold, 2009). It turns out that the total net energy of a flat universe is precisely 0, as the positive energy of all observable particles is cancelled out perfectly by the negative force of gravity, of everything pulling on everything else (Filippenko, 2002); to me, this is perhaps the most poetic known fact about the plane of existence in which we subsist, for it shows us that the hundreds of trillions of galaxies and other such astronomical phenomena that hold us rapt in awe essentially

amount to nothing. This is made even more profound by the fact that only a flat universe can come out of absolute emptiness, as its only causal prerequisite is a tiny spark of energy (Filippenko, 2002). To explain where this tiny spark could potentially come from, theoretical physicists turn to quantum fluctuation and the principles of quantum mechanics. The most fundamental divergence between classical, traditional physics and quantum theory occurs in their disparate conceptualizations of nothingness. A classical vacuum can be characterized as an ultimate emptiness, an area that is completely devoid of particles, energy, and even the fabric of space. On the other hand, a quantum vacuum entails a similar void, but with fantastic amounts of virtual particles constantly popping into existence and spontaneously annihilating themselves (Ferri, 1988). Quite simply put, quantum mechanics dictate that we live in a universe where nothingness is essentially a misnomer; even with empty space devoid of matter, there is always something. This constant generation of energy and self-destructive virtual particles is the crux of quantum fluctuation. In a lecture, acclaimed cosmologist Stephen Hawking provided a metaphorical visualization of the quantum origins theory; Hawking visualizes the universe as a foam of bubbles in boiling water, each bubble a separate quantum fluctuation. Bubbles of diminutive size will expand only slightly before collapsing and subsequently disintegrating. However, a few larger bubbles will expand past the critical point of collapse, after which they will continue to grow and develop such diverse astronomical phenomena as galaxies and planets (Lu, 2007). Given that quantum fluctuation can produce minute sparks of energy out of nothingness, it is not unreasonable to speculate that the universe (or whatever plane of existence persisted before the Big Bang) was in a completely quantum state, in which repeated quantum fluctuation triggered the formation of a universe. The next logical step would be to inquire into the origins of the quantum plane described above, but the concepts set forth by this question are arbitrary when placed in the context of pre-universal mechanics. The very ideas of space and time (the foundations upon which our understanding and perception are based) were created at the moment of the conception of our universe. Thus, instead of addressing the issue of regressive causality with the constraints of time and space, theoretical physicists look to far more empirical notions such as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. One of the most fundamental facets of quantum theory, the Uncertainty Principle states that one cannot simultaneously affix both a position and a momentum to any physical system, especially one that involves random fluctuation (Hilgevoord, 2006). Such indeterminacy suggests that in an environment dictated only by quantum states, the concept of causality breaks down completely, rendering the theory of quantum fluctuation impervious to regression. Perhaps, discoveries as profound as this will facilitate a massive paradigm shift in society; instead of holding to the conviction that there are questions that scientific progress cannot possibly answer, our culture may progress to a point of public realization, wherein those who run to mythology and superstition to extract their epistemologies may at last concede that their absolutist claims are primitive and deserve no merit when it comes to truth value. Rather, with enough perseverance and initiative, mankind can unravel mysteries as difficult and as conceptually elusive as those of the universes conception. Philosophy can only take one so far, as it deals primarily with illusion-prone human perception; it also does not take into account the cutting edge science that often renders it obsolete when it comes to functional explanations for natural phenomena. So in this sense, slowly extricating the complexity of the universe will allow

us to supplant the un- parsimonious, and to rid mankind of the epistemological safety- blankets that have so weakly served him thus far.

Literature Cited Filippenko, A. V., & Pasachoff, J. M. (2002, March). A Universe from nothing. Retrieved from http://www.astrosociety.org/pubs/mercury/31_02/ nothing.html Ferris, T. (1988). Coming of age in the milky way. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers. Griswold, B. (2009, November 19). Is the Universe infinite?. Retrieved from http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html Hilgevoord, J. (2006). The Uncertainty Principle. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved (2009, December 4) from http://plato.stanford. edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/#HeiArg Lu, A. (2007, March 14). Renowned cosmologist draws sold -out crowd. The Daily Californian, Retrieved from http://www.dailycal.org/article/23829/ renowned_cosmologist_draws_sold -out_crowd Preuss, P. (2002, October 2). Shape of the universe: scientists consider three possibilities. Retrieved from http://www.lbl.gov/ScienceArticles/Archive/SNAP-3.html