Regarding Hector Trujillo’s “Science and Reality Today” column in the Sept. 27 issue of the Town Crier, the problem is not with the physics. The problem is with the present (old?) concept of “nothing,” “nothingness,” or “empty.”
The evidence is that “empty” space is not empty in the way we thought of “empty” before experiments in quantum physics. Evidently matter can come from quantum fluctuations in what we perceive as empty space.
[Lawrence] Krauss [author of “A Universe From Nothing”] may not be correct in his proposed explanation of the origin of the universe, but the evidence is that empty space is not “empty” in the conventional meaning of the word.
One defining feature of science is that when empirical evidence conflicts with prior notions, scientists adjust their notions in accord with the evidence, e.g. the speed of light is the same for all observers.
People used to think the earth was flat. People used to think the earth sat on the backs of enormous turtles. People used to think the sun revolved around the earth. People used to think the Milky Way was the entire universe. People used to think the universe was static and unchanging.
People used to believe many things that now seem quaint. Some people still believe in evil spirits and assorted forms of magic.
I find it comforting that personal beliefs or prior notions don’t change verifiable, empirical evidence.