Die fisika se “niks” is nie niks nie
Kort antwoord: Wanneer ‘n fisikus sê die heelal het uit niks gekom, bedoel hy gewoonlik ‘n kwantumvakuum: ‘n fisiese toestand met energie en wette. Dit is nie niks nie. Dit is iets, en dit het self ‘n verklaring nodig.
Jy blaai op jou foon en daar is ‘n kort snit van ‘n fisikus op ‘n verhoog. “Die heelal kan uit niks ontstaan,” sê hy. “Die fisika wys hoe. Ons het nie ‘n Skepper nodig nie.” Onder die video is duisende duimpies.
Dit klink of die wetenskap die laaste woord gespreek het. Maar alles hang aan een woord.
Wat waar is
Begin by wat waar is. Sover die kosmologie kan sien, het die heelal ‘n begin gehad, so 13,8 miljard jaar gelede. En die kwantumfisika is werklik vreemd. In wat ons “leë” ruimte noem, verskyn en verdwyn deeltjies vir ‘n oomblik. Dit is gemeet.
Die fisikus Lawrence Krauss het in 2012 ‘n hele boek hieroor geskryf, met die titel A Universe from Nothing. Die fisika daarin is ernstige fisika. Die probleem lê by die titel.
Watter niks?
Kyk wat die “niks” in sulke boeke bevat. Daar is ‘n kwantumveld. Daar is energie. Daar is wette wat bepaal wat mag gebeur en wat nie. Dit is ‘n stuk werklikheid, net leeg van die dinge wat ons gewoond is om te sien.
Om dit “niks” te noem, is soos om ‘n leë stadion “niks” te noem omdat die wedstryd nog nie begin het nie. Die gras is gesny, die ligte brand, en die reëls van die spel lê klaar.
Ware niks het geen ruimte nie, geen tyd nie, geen veld nie, geen wette nie, selfs geen moontlikheid nie. Uit sulke niks kom niks. Die ou Latynse spreuk sê dit kort: ex nihilo nihil fit. As daar werklik niks was, sou daar nie eens ‘n reël wees wat sê iets mag begin nie.
So die vraag het nie verdwyn nie. Dit het net een stap teruggeskuif: waar kom die veld en sy wette vandaan? Stephen Hawking het self gevra wat dit is wat vuur in die vergelykings blaas, sodat daar ‘n heelal is wat hulle kan beskryf. Vergelykings op papier maak nie heelalle nie.
Die draai
Hier is die verrassing. Die kerk het lank voor Krauss gesê die wêreld is “uit niks” geskep, creatio ex nihilo. Maar sy bedoel daarmee die regte niks. Juis omdat niks niks kan voortbring nie, moet die wêreld se bestaan kom van Iemand wat self nie gemaak is nie.
En die begin is nie eens die hoofsaak nie. Al het die heelal geen begin gehad nie, sou dit steeds sy bestaan geleen het. ‘n Vakuum verklaar nie waarom daar ‘n vakuum is nie. Die Christelike geloof sê nie net dat God die heelal aan die gang gesit het nie. Hy dra dit elke oomblik deur sy woord (Hebreërs 1:3).
Die fisikus beskryf hoe die wedstryd begin. Hy het nog nie verklaar waarom daar ‘n stadion is nie.
Volgende keer
As iemand sê die heelal het uit niks gekom, vra net: “Watter niks? Die een met wette in, of die een sonder?”
As dit die een met wette is, het julle eintlik oor iets gepraat.
Gaan dieper
Physics’ “nothing” is not nothing
Short answer: When a physicist says the universe came from nothing, he usually means a quantum vacuum: a physical state with energy and laws. That is not nothing. It is something, and it needs an explanation of its own.
You are scrolling on your phone and there is a short clip of a physicist on a stage. “The universe can come from nothing,” he says. “Physics shows how. We don’t need a Creator.” Under the video there are thousands of likes.
It sounds as if science has had the last word. But everything hangs on one word.
What is true
Start with what is true. As far as cosmology can see, the universe had a beginning, about 13.8 billion years ago. And quantum physics really is strange. In what we call “empty” space, particles appear and vanish for an instant. This has been measured.
The physicist Lawrence Krauss wrote a whole book about it in 2012, titled A Universe from Nothing. The physics in it is serious physics. The problem lies in the title.
Which nothing?
Look at what the “nothing” in such books contains. There is a quantum field. There is energy. There are laws that decide what may happen and what may not. It is a piece of reality, only empty of the things we are used to seeing.
Calling it “nothing” is like calling an empty stadium “nothing” because the match has not started. The grass is cut, the floodlights are on, and the rules of the game are already in place.
Real nothing has no space, no time, no field, no laws, not even a possibility. From that kind of nothing, nothing comes. The old Latin saying puts it briefly: ex nihilo nihil fit. If there were truly nothing, there would not even be a rule saying something may begin.
So the question has not gone away. It has only moved back one step: where do the field and its laws come from? Stephen Hawking himself asked what it is that breathes fire into the equations, so that there is a universe for them to describe. Equations on paper do not make universes.
The turn
Here is the surprise. Long before Krauss, the church said the world was created “out of nothing”, creatio ex nihilo. But she meant the real nothing. Precisely because nothing can produce nothing, the world’s existence must come from Someone who was not himself made.
And the beginning is not even the main point. Even if the universe had no beginning, it would still have borrowed its existence. A vacuum does not explain why there is a vacuum. The Christian faith does not only say that God set the universe going. He upholds it every moment by his word (Hebrews 1:3).
The physicist describes how the match kicks off. He has not yet explained why there is a stadium.
Next time
When someone says the universe came from nothing, just ask: “Which nothing? The one with laws in it, or the one without?”
If it is the one with laws, you have actually been talking about something.