Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Streaming of thousands of movies and TV shows with limited ads on Prime Video.
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
-20% $19.92$19.92
Ships from: Amazon Sold by: Books4theLOW
$7.74$7.74
Ships from: Amazon Sold by: RNA TRADE LLC
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
OK
Audible sample Sample
A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing Hardcover – January 10, 2012
Purchase options and add-ons
Lawrence Krauss’s provocative answers to these and other timeless questions in a wildly popular lecture now on YouTube have attracted almost a million viewers. The last of these questions in particular has been at the center of religious and philosophical debates about the existence of God, and it’s the supposed counterargument to anyone who questions the need for God. As Krauss argues, scientists have, however, historically focused on other, more pressing issues—such as figuring out how the universe actually functions, which can ultimately help us to improve the quality of our lives.
Now, in a cosmological story that rivets as it enlightens, pioneering theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss explains the groundbreaking new scientific advances that turn the most basic philosophical questions on their heads. One of the few prominent scientists today to have actively crossed the chasm between science and popular culture, Krauss reveals that modern science is addressing the question of why there is something rather than nothing, with surprising and fascinating results. The staggeringly beautiful experimental observations and mind-bending new theories are all described accessibly in A Universe from Nothing, and they suggest that not only can something arise from nothing, something will always arise from nothing.
With his characteristic wry humor and wonderfully clear explanations, Krauss takes us back to the beginning of the beginning, presenting the most recent evidence for how our universe evolved—and the implications for how it’s going to end. It will provoke, challenge, and delight readers as it looks at the most basic underpinnings of existence in a whole new way. And this knowledge that our universe will be quite different in the future from today has profound implications and directly affects how we live in the present. As Richard Dawkins has described it: This could potentially be the most important scientific book with implications for supernaturalism since Darwin.
A fascinating antidote to outmoded philosophical and religious thinking, A Universe from Nothing is a provocative, game-changing entry into the debate about the existence of God and everything that exists. “Forget Jesus,” Krauss has argued, “the stars died so you could be born.”
- Print length224 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherAtria Books
- Publication dateJanuary 10, 2012
- Dimensions6.25 x 1 x 9.75 inches
- ISBN-109781451624458
- ISBN-13978-1451624458
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now
Frequently bought together
Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Editorial Reviews
From Booklist
Review
"Astronomers at the beginning of the twentieth century were wondering whether there was anything beyond our Milky Way Galaxy. As Lawrence Krauss lucidly explains, astronomers living two trillion years from now, will perhaps be pondering precisely the same question! Beautifully navigating through deep intellectual waters, Krauss presents the most recent ideas on the nature of our cosmos, and of our place within it. A fascinating read."
-- Mario Livio, author of Is God A Mathematician? and The Golden Ratio
"In this clear and crisply written book, Lawrence Krauss outlines the compelling evidence that our complex cosmos has evolved from a hot, dense state and how this progress has emboldened theorists to develop fascinating speculations about how things really began."
-- Martin Rees, author of Our Final Hour
“A series of brilliant insights and astonishing discoveries have rocked the Universe in recent years, and Lawrence Krauss has been in the thick of it. With his characteristic verve, and using many clever devices, he’s made that remarkable story remarkably accessible. The climax is a bold scientific answer to the great question of existence: Why is there something rather than nothing.”
-- Frank Wilczek, Nobel Laureate and Herman Feshbach professor at MIT, author of The Lightness of Being
"With characteristic wit, eloquence and clarity Lawrence Krauss gives a wonderfully illuminating account of how science deals with one of the biggest questions of all: how the universe's existence could arise from nothing. It is a question that philosophy and theology get themselves into muddle over, but that science can offer real answers to, as Krauss's lucid explanation shows. Here is the triumph of physics over metaphysics, reason and enquiry over obfuscation and myth, made plain for all to see: Krauss gives us a treat as well as an education in fascinating style."
--A. C. Grayling, author of The Good Book
"We have been living through a revolution in cosmology as wondrous as that initiated by Copernicus. Here is the essential, engrossing and brilliant guide."
--Ian McEwan
“Nothing is not nothing. Nothing is something. That's how a cosmos can be spawned from the void -- a profound idea conveyed in A Universe From Nothing that unsettles some yet enlightens others. Meanwhile, it's just another day on the job for physicist Lawrence Krauss.”
-- Neil deGrasse Tyson, Astrophysicist, American Museum of Natural History
"Lively and humorous as well as informative… As compelling as it is intriguing.” (Publishers Weekly)
“[An] excellent guide to cutting-edge physics… It is detailed but lucid, thorough but not stodgy… [an] insightful book… Space and time can indeed come from nothing; nothing, as Krauss explains beautifully. …A Universe From Nothing is a great book: readable, informative and topical.” (New Scientist)
"Krauss possesses a rare talent for making the hardest ideas in astrophysics accessible to the layman, due in part to his sly humor… one has to hope that this book won't appeal only to the partisans of the culture wars – it's just too good and interesting for that. Krauss is genuinely in awe of the "wondrously strange" nature of our physical world, and his enthusiasm is infectious.” (San Francisco Chronicle, Huffington Post, AP)
“How physicists came up with the current model of the cosmos is quite a story, and to tell it in his elegant A Universe From Nothing, physicist Lawrence Krauss walks a carefully laid path… It would be easy for this remarkable story to revel in self-congratulation, but Krauss steers it soberly and with grace… His asides on how he views each piece of science and its chances of being right are refreshingly honest…unstable nothingness, as described by Krauss… is also invigorating for the rest of us, because in this nothingness there are many wonderful things to see and understand.” (Nature)
"In A Universe From Nothing, Lawrence Krauss, celebrated physicist, speaker and author, tackles all that plus a whole lot else. In fewer than 200 pages, he delivers a spirited, fast-paced romp through modern cosmology and its strong underpinnings in astronomical observations and particle physics theory.Krauss’s slim volume is bolder in its premise and more ambitious in its scope than most. He makes a persuasive case that the ultimate question of cosmic origin – how something, namely the universe, could arise from nothing – belongs in the realm of science rather than theology or philosophy." (Globe & Mail)
“An eloquent guide to our expanding universe… There have been a number of fine cosmology books published recently but few have gone so far, and none so eloquently, in exploring why it is unnecessary to invoke God to light the blue touchpaper and set the universe in motion.”
(Financial Times)
"His arguments for the birth of the universe out of nothingness from a physical, rather than theological, beginning not only are logical but celebrate the wonder of our natural universe. Recommended." (Library Journal)
“Krauss possesses a rare talent for making the hardest ideas in astrophysics accessible to the layman, due in part to his sly humor… one has to hope that this book won't appeal only to the partisans of the culture wars – it's just too good and interesting for that. Krauss is genuinely in awe of the "wondrously strange" nature of our physical world, and his enthusiasm is infectious.” (Associated Press)
"With its mind-bending mechanics, Krauss argues, our universe may indeed have appeared from nowhere, rather than at the hands of a divine creator. There's some intellectual heavy lifting here—Einstein is the main character, after all—but the concepts are articulated clearly, and the thrill of discovery is contagious. 'We are like the early terrestrial mapmakers,' Krauss writes, puzzling out what was once solely the province of our imaginations." (Mother Jones)
"The author delivers plenty of jolts in this enthusiastic and lucid but demanding overview of the universe, which includes plenty of mysteries—but its origin isn’t among them. A thoughtful, challenging book." (Kirkus)
"People always say you can't get something from nothing. Thankfully, Lawrence Krauss didn't listen. In fact, something big happens to you during this book about cosmic nothing, and before you can help it, your mind will be expanding as rapidly as the early universe." (Sam Kean, author of The Disappearing Spoon)
About the Author
Richard Dawkins is a Fellow of the Royal Society and was the inaugural holder of the Charles Simonyi Chair of Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is the acclaimed author of many books including The Selfish Gene, Climbing Mount Improbable, Unweaving the Rainbow, The Ancestor’s Tale, The God Delusion,and The Greatest Show on Earth. Visit him at RichardDawkins.net.
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Dream or nightmare, we have to live our experience as it is, and we have to live it awake. We live in a world which is penetrated through and through by science and which is both whole and real. We cannot turn it into a game simply by taking sides.
—JACOB BRONOWSKI
In the interests of full disclosure right at the outset I must admit that I am not sympathetic to the conviction that creation requires a creator, which is at the basis of all of the world’s religions. Every day beautiful and miraculous objects suddenly appear, from snowflakes on a cold winter morning to vibrant rainbows after a late-afternoon summer shower. Yet no one but the most ardent fundamentalists would suggest that each and every such object is lovingly and painstakingly and, most important, purposefully created by a divine intelligence. In fact, many laypeople as well as scientists revel in our ability to explain how snowflakes and rainbows can spontaneously appear, based on simple, elegant laws of physics.
Of course, one can ask, and many do, “Where do the laws of physics come from?” as well as more suggestively, “Who created these laws?” Even if one can answer this first query, the petitioner will then often ask, “But where did that come from?” or “Who created that?” and so on.
Ultimately, many thoughtful people are driven to the apparent need for First Cause, as Plato, Aquinas, or the modern Roman Catholic Church might put it, and thereby to suppose some divine being: a creator of all that there is, and all that there ever will be, someone or something eternal and everywhere.
Nevertheless, the declaration of a First Cause still leaves open the question, “Who created the creator?” After all, what is the difference between arguing in favor of an eternally existing creator versus an eternally existing universe without one?
These arguments always remind me of the famous story of an expert giving a lecture on the origins of the universe (sometimes identified as Bertrand Russell and sometimes William James), who is challenged by a woman who believes that the world is held up by a gigantic turtle, who is then held up by another turtle, and then another . . . with further turtles “all the way down!” An infinite regress of some creative force that begets itself, even some imagined force that is greater than turtles, doesn’t get us any closer to what it is that gives rise to the universe. Nonetheless, this metaphor of an infinite regression may actually be closer to the real process by which the universe came to be than a single creator would explain.
Defining away the question by arguing that the buck stops with God may seem to obviate the issue of infinite regression, but here I invoke my mantra: The universe is the way it is, whether we like it or not. The existence or nonexistence of a creator is independent of our desires. A world without God or purpose may seem harsh or pointless, but that alone doesn’t require God to actually exist.
Similarly, our minds may not be able to easily comprehend infinities (although mathematics, a product of our minds, deals with them rather nicely), but that doesn’t tell us that infinities don’t exist. Our universe could be infinite in spatial or temporal extent. Or, as Richard Feynman once put it, the laws of physics could be like an infinitely layered onion, with new laws becoming operational as we probe new scales. We simply don’t know!
For more than two thousand years, the question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” has been presented as a challenge to the proposition that our universe—which contains the vast complex of stars, galaxies, humans, and who knows what else—might have arisen without design, intent, or purpose. While this is usually framed as a philosophical or religious question, it is first and foremost a question about the natural world, and so the appropriate place to try and resolve it, first and foremost, is with science.
The purpose of this book is simple. I want to show how modern science, in various guises, can address and is addressing the question of why there is something rather than nothing: The answers that have been obtained—from staggeringly beautiful experimental observations, as well as from the theories that underlie much of modern physics—all suggest that getting something from nothing is not a problem. Indeed, something from nothing may have been required for the universe to come into being. Moreover, all signs suggest that this is how our universe could have arisen.
I stress the word could here, because we may never have enough empirical information to resolve this question unambiguously. But the fact that a universe from nothing is even plausible is certainly significant, at least to me.
Before going further, I want to devote a few words to the notion of “nothing”—a topic that I will return to at some length later. For I have learned that, when discussing this question in public forums, nothing upsets the philosophers and theologians who disagree with me more than the notion that I, as a scientist, do not truly understand “nothing.” (I am tempted to retort here that theologians are experts at nothing.)
“Nothing,” they insist, is not any of the things I discuss. Nothing is “nonbeing,” in some vague and ill-defined sense. This reminds me of my own efforts to define “intelligent design” when I first began debating with creationists, of which, it became clear, there is no clear definition, except to say what it isn’t. “Intelligent design” is simply a unifying umbrella for opposing evolution. Similarly, some philosophers and many theologians define and redefine “nothing” as not being any of the versions of nothing that scientists currently describe.
But therein, in my opinion, lies the intellectual bankruptcy of much of theology and some of modern philosophy. For surely “nothing” is every bit as physical as “something,” especially if it is to be defined as the “absence of something.” It then behooves us to understand precisely the physical nature of both these quantities. And without science, any definition is just words.
A century ago, had one described “nothing” as referring to purely empty space, possessing no real material entity, this might have received little argument. But the results of the past century have taught us that empty space is in fact far from the inviolate nothingness that we presupposed before we learned more about how nature works. Now, I am told by religious critics that I cannot refer to empty space as “nothing,” but rather as a “quantum vacuum,” to distinguish it from the philosopher’s or theologian’s idealized “nothing.”
So be it. But what if we are then willing to describe “nothing” as the absence of space and time itself? Is this sufficient? Again, I suspect it would have been . . . at one time. But, as I shall describe, we have learned that space and time can themselves spontaneously appear, so now we are told that even this “nothing” is not really the nothing that matters. And we’re told that the escape from the “real” nothing requires divinity, with “nothing” thus defined by fiat to be “that from which only God can create something.”
It has also been suggested by various individuals with whom I have debated the issue that, if there is the “potential” to create something, then that is not a state of true nothingness. And surely having laws of nature that give such potential takes us away from the true realm of nonbeing. But then, if I argue that perhaps the laws themselves also arose spontaneously, as I shall describe might be the case, then that too is not good enough, because whatever system in which the laws may have arisen is not true nothingness.
Turtles all the way down? I don’t believe so. But the turtles are appealing because science is changing the playing field in ways that make people uncomfortable. Of course, that is one of the purposes of science (one might have said “natural philosophy” in Socratic times). Lack of comfort means we are on the threshold of new insights. Surely, invoking “God” to avoid difficult questions of “how” is merely intellectually lazy. After all, if there were no potential for creation, then God couldn’t have created anything. It would be semantic hocus-pocus to assert that the potentially infinite regression is avoided because God exists outside nature and, therefore, the “potential” for existence itself is not a part of the nothingness from which existence arose.
My real purpose here is to demonstrate that in fact science has changed the playing field, so that these abstract and useless debates about the nature of nothingness have been replaced by useful, operational efforts to describe how our universe might actually have originated. I will also explain the possible implications of this for our present and future.
This reflects a very important fact. When it comes to understanding how our universe evolves, religion and theology have been at best irrelevant. They often muddy the waters, for example, by focusing on questions of nothingness without providing any definition of the term based on empirical evidence. While we do not yet fully understand the origin of our universe, there is no reason to expect things to change in this regard. Moreover, I expect that ultimately the same will be true for our understanding of areas that religion now considers its own territory, such as human morality.
Science has been effective at furthering our understanding of nature because the scientific ethos is based on three key principles: (1) follow the evidence wherever it leads; (2) if one has a theory, one needs to be willing to try to prove it wrong as much as one tries to prove that it is right; (3) the ultimate arbiter of truth is experiment, not the comfort one derives from one’s a priori beliefs, nor the beauty or elegance one ascribes to one’s theoretical models.
The results of experiments that I will describe here are not only timely, they are also unexpected. The tapestry that science weaves in describing the evolution of our universe is far richer and far more fascinating than any revelatory images or imaginative stories that humans have concocted. Nature comes up with surprises that far exceed those that the human imagination can generate.
Over the past two decades, an exciting series of developments in cosmology, particle theory, and gravitation have completely changed the way we view the universe, with startling and profound implications for our understanding of its origins as well as its future. Nothing could therefore not be more interesting to write about, if you can forgive the pun.
The true inspiration for this book comes not so much from a desire to dispel myths or attack beliefs, as from my desire to celebrate knowledge and, along with it, the absolutely surprising and fascinating universe that ours has turned out to be.
Our search will take us on a whirlwind tour to the farthest reaches of our expanding universe, from the earliest moments of the Big Bang to the far future, and will include perhaps the most surprising discovery in physics in the past century.
Indeed, the immediate motivation for writing this book now is a profound discovery about the universe that has driven my own scientific research for most of the past three decades and that has resulted in the startling conclusion that most of the energy in the universe resides in some mysterious, now inexplicable form permeating all of empty space. It is not an understatement to say that this discovery has changed the playing field of modern cosmology.
For one thing, this discovery has produced remarkable new support for the idea that our universe arose from precisely nothing. It has also provoked us to rethink both a host of assumptions about the processes that might govern its evolution and, ultimately, the question of whether the very laws of nature are truly fundamental. Each of these, in its own turn, now tends to make the question of why there is something rather than nothing appear less imposing, if not completely facile, as I hope to describe.
The direct genesis of this book hearkens back to October of 2009, when I delivered a lecture in Los Angeles with the same title. Much to my surprise, the YouTube video of the lecture, made available by the Richard Dawkins Foundation, has since become something of a sensation, with nearly a million viewings as of this writing, and numerous copies of parts of it being used by both the atheist and theist communities in their debates.
Because of the clear interest in this subject, and also as a result of some of the confusing commentary on the web and in various media following my lecture, I thought it worth producing a more complete rendition of the ideas that I had expressed there in this book. Here I can also take the opportunity to add to the arguments I presented at the time, which focused almost completely on the recent revolutions in cosmology that have changed our picture of the universe, associated with the discovery of the energy and geometry of space, and which I discuss in the first two-thirds of this book.
In the intervening period, I have thought a lot more about the many antecedents and ideas constituting my argument; I’ve discussed it with others who reacted with a kind of enthusiasm that was infectious; and I’ve explored in more depth the impact of developments in particle physics, in particular, on the issue of the origin and nature of our universe. And finally, I have exposed some of my arguments to those who vehemently oppose them, and in so doing have gained some insights that have helped me develop my arguments further.
While fleshing out the ideas I have ultimately tried to describe here, I benefitted tremendously from discussions with some of my most thoughtful physics colleagues. In particular I wanted to thank Alan Guth and Frank Wilczek for taking the time to have extended discussions and correspondence with me, resolving some confusions in my own mind and in certain cases helping reinforce my own interpretations.
Emboldened by the interest of Leslie Meredith and Dominick Anfuso at Free Press, Simon & Schuster, in the possibility of a book on this subject, I then contacted my friend Christopher Hitchens, who, besides being one of the most literate and brilliant individuals I know, had himself been able to use some of the arguments from my lecture in his remarkable series of debates on science and religion. Christopher, in spite of his ill health, kindly, generously, and bravely agreed to write a foreword. For that act of friendship and trust, I will be eternally grateful. Unfortunately, Christopher’s illness eventually overwhelmed him to the extent that completing the foreword became impossible, in spite of his best efforts. Nevertheless, in an embarrassment of riches, my eloquent, brilliant friend, the renowned scientist and writer Richard Dawkins, had earlier agreed to write an afterword. After my first draft was completed, he then proceeded to produce something in short order whose beauty and clarity was astounding, and at the same time humbling. I remain in awe. To Christopher, Richard, then, and all of those above, I issue my thanks for their support and encouragement, and for motivating me to once again return to my computer and write.
© 2012 Lawrence M. Krauss
Product details
- ASIN : 145162445X
- Publisher : Atria Books; First Edition (January 10, 2012)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 224 pages
- ISBN-10 : 9781451624458
- ISBN-13 : 978-1451624458
- Item Weight : 12.8 ounces
- Dimensions : 6.25 x 1 x 9.75 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #194,925 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #242 in Cosmology (Books)
- #319 in Astrophysics & Space Science (Books)
- #586 in History & Philosophy of Science (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
I was born in New York City and shortly afterward moved to Toronto, spending my childhood in Canada. I received undergraduate degrees in mathematics and physics from Carleton University in Ottawa Canada, and my Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1982.
After three year a stint in the Harvard Society of Fellows, I was a professor at Yale University for eight years and then, when I was 38 I moved to become Ambrose Swasey Professor of Physics, professor of astronomy, and Chairman of the Physics Department at Case Western Reserve University. Since then I have held endowed positions at a variety of Universities around the world in departments ranging from physics and astronomy, to earth and space exploration.I retired from academia in 2019 at age 65 when I became President of The Origins Project Foundation, (www.originsprojectfoundation.org) and independent non-profit foundation furthering the public understanding of science, and enhancing connections between science and culture. In the same year I became host of The Origins Podcast with Lawrence M. Krauss (www.theoriginspodcast.com), where I have extended video dialogues with the most interesting people in the world.
My research focuses on the beginning and end of the Universe. Among my contributions to the field of cosmology, I helped lead the search for dark matter, and proposed the existence of dark energy in 1995, three years before its observational discovery, which received the Nobel Prize in 2011.
I write regularly for national media, including The New York Times, The New Yorker, the Wall St. Journal, The Globe and Mail, The National Post, Quillette, Prospect, and other magazines, as well as doing extensive work on radio and television and most recently in feature films.
I am strongly committed to public understanding of science, and have helped lead the national effort to preserve sound science teaching, including the teaching of evolution, for which I was awarded the National Science Board's Award for the Public Understanding of Science. I also served on Barack Obama's 2008 Presidential campaign science policy committee. I was honored to be Chair of the Board of Sponsors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists from 2006-2018, and from 2010-2019 was on the Board of Directors of the Federation of American Scientists.
I became a scientist in part because I read books by other scientists, such as Albert Einstein, George Gamow, Sir James Jeans, etc, when I was a child, and was inspired meeting various scientist-heroes including Richard Feynman and my popular writing returns the favor. One of my greatest joys is when a young person comes up to me and tells me that one of my books motivated them to become a scientist.
I believe science is not only a vital part of our culture, but is fun, and I try and convey that in my books and lectures. I am honored that Scientific American referred to me as a rare scientific public intellectual, and that all three three major US Physics Societies: the American Physical Society, the American Association of Physics Teachers, and the American Institute of Physics, have seen fit to honor me with their highest awards for research and writing.
I have now written 12 popular books on various aspects of science and culture, including the two New York Times Bestsellers, The Physics of Star Trek, and A Universe from Nothing. These two books sold over 500,000 copies in English alone and the latter was translated into 25 languages.
My last book, The Physics of Climate Change, was published in March 2021. I wrote it during the pandemic, when I was able to take time to fully immerse myself in updating my knowledge of climate science and trying to translate it into popular language. This book cuts through the confusion by succinctly presenting the underlying science of climate change. It presents the underlying science behind climate change, free of political bias, or jargon so that all readers can understand one of the most important issues of our time, and allows laypeople to assess which climate predictions are firmest and which are more speculative . A departure from much of the focus of my previous books, it addresses a timely issue that should impact on the basis of ongoing public policy.
My newest book, The Edge of Knowledge: Unsolved Mysteries of the Cosmos (in the UK it is entitled The Known Unknowns: The Unsolved Mysteries of the Cosmos) is a roller coaster ride taking us to the limits of what we know, and more importantly, what we know we don't know about the Universe. Divided into 5 sections: Time, Space, Matter, Life, and Consciousness, it takes the greatest unsolved problems in science. It is a celebration of how far we have come in understanding the universe, while providing an invitation to the next generation of young people to take up the challenge. The Universe continues to surprise us, but it will only do that if we keep asking questions, and keep exploring it. The rewards are ultimately a better understanding of our own place in the cosmos, including where we came from, and where we are heading.
When not writing or doing research or relaxing at home with my family, I love to mountain bike, fly fish, and scuba dive.
You can find more about my research, my activities, and my opinions on my substack site Critical Mass at LawrenceKrauss.substack.com or web page lawrencemkrauss.com or on my twitter feed @Lkrauss1 or at https://wakelet.com/@LawrenceKrauss
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviews with images
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
"A Universe from Nothing" is the fascinating book about how our universe came from nothing. Using the latest in scientific knowledge, his expertise and the innate ability to explain very complex topics in accessible manner earns this book five stars. Lawrence Krauss takes us on an exciting voyage of discovery that helps us understand the universe and further whets our appetite for more knowledge. This 224-page book is composed of the following eleven chapters: 1. A Cosmic Mystery Story: Beginnings, 2. A Cosmic Mystery Story: Weighing the Universe, 3. Light from the Beginning of Time, 4. Much Ado About Nothing, 5. The Runaway Universe, 6. The Free Lunch at the End of the Universe, 7. Our Miserable Future, 8. A Grand Accident?, 9. Nothing Is Something, 10. Nothing Is Unstable, and 11. Brave New Worlds.
Positives:
1. This book is truly something! A page turner.
2. A thought-provoking, inspirational quest for knowledge...I loved it!
3. A profound book that is intelligible. An achievement in its own right. Very complex topics accessible to the masses. Thank you.
4. Elegant prose with conviction. Lucid and clarity in a world of dark matter.
5. A journey of cosmological discoveries.
6. Effective use of charts and illustrations.
7. I have a much better understanding of our universe as a result of this book and most importantly it has only whet my appetite for even more knowledge...and that's why I read.
8. A love affair with science and for good reason. The three key principles of scientific ethos.
9. Startling conclusions are presented. The author does a wonderful job of letting us know what we do know versus what we don't know.
10. Some of the greatest discoveries presented.
11. I finally have a reasonable grasp of the Big Bang, Bazinga! The three main observational pillars.
12. Of course you will get to hear about the greats of science but I really appreciate the stories of the lesser known scientists who provided vital knowledge, such as, the story of Henrietta Swan Leavitt and Vera Rubin. Bravo!
13. Great facts spruced throughout the book and some jaw-dropping insight. One scientist was able to defend his mother in a witchcraft trial...find out whom.
14. What general relativity tells us.
15. The uses for gravitational lensing. Let's get Zwicky with it.
16. Dark matter and dark energy...enlighten me. Or at least try.
17. Quantum mechanics, I will never understand it but I can appreciate it what it provides.
18. The author does a good job of telling us what scientific progress has been made and how that applies to cosmology.
19. A flat universe?? Find out.
20. An explanation of nothing that means something to me. Can you say quantum fluctuations?
21. A "creator" in proper perspective. The requirement of some externality. Read it and you will understand.
22. Multiverses...oh my.
23. String theory a critical view.
24. A little bit of philosophy for good measure.
25. The best explanation for how something can come out of nothing to best current knowledge available.
26. Key concepts will now become part of your understanding..."the existence of energy in empty space".
27. Black holes under the light and some very interesting takes.
28. Spoiler alert...one of the most profound questions, "What I want to know is whether God had any choice in the creation of the universe." Thank you, Mr. Einstein.
29. An interesting look at Aristotle and the First Cause in the light of new knowledge.
30. The book ends with a bang of reality.
Negatives:
1. No links or bibliography.
2. A lot of the concepts of this book are hard to grasp. Some readers may not have the patience and inclination to take the time to properly digest what is being offered. That being said, the author does wonders in making such difficult concepts accessible.
In summary, this is a fantastic book, a real treat. I learned so much and admire the author for providing a book that is accessible and enjoyable to the masses. This book lived up to my expectations. Fascinating topics in the hands of a master results in a captivating book. This is how science books should be written. I can't recommend this book enough!
Further suggestions: " The Quantum Universe: (And Why Anything That Can Happen, Does) " and " Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?) " by Brian Cox, " Quantum Man: Richard Feynman's Life in Science (Great Discoveries) " also by Lawrence Krauss, " Nothing: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) " by Frank Close, " Knocking on Heaven's Door: How Physics and Scientific Thinking Illuminate the Universe and the Modern World " by Lisa Randall, and " The Grand Design " by Stephen Hawking.
The book prompted me to watch Krauss' Sept. 11, 2011 talk posted on Youtube that briefly summarized the key ideas. Krauss' side-comments during the talk, as well as the introduction by Richard Dawkins, again declared in which philosophical camp they wished to pitch their tent. But I worry that the elegant scientific concepts summarized do not so clearly lead to that depressing existential position. Krauss jokingly shared his view of the human situation near the start of his talk when he remarked that he had considered using the title, We Are All Fu..ed! Humorous, but is it true?
The eminent philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) was a bit more poetic in his choice of language as he wrote in 1903 of humanity's desperate situation (I quote from a rendition published by Augros and Stanciu in The New Story of Science (1984), an interesting book but one with major flaws of its own):
"That man is the product of causes which had no provision of the end they were achieving; that his origins, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and beliefs are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labors of the ages, all the devotion ... all the noonday brightness of human genius are destined to extinction ... all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built."
In sum, in his book Krauss wonderfully recounts in an approachable style the key concepts of modern cosmology, but falls with rather startling self-certainty into the depressing philosophical notions voiced by Russell more than a century ago. Krauss was a bit more flexible in his Youtube talk when for one brief moment he showed one slide and remarked about the element of mystery in all this. But he radically undervalues this element. As I will explain, mystery is fundamental in view of a necessary first logical but unprovable step required in all complex arguments.
In spite of the keen desire by Krauss and Dawkins to be, I presume, purely rational scientists untainted by wishful thinking, these sorts of truly strong scientific intellectuals must recognize that any argument must begin with one or a few key unproven assumptions -- this is unavoidable. As has been elegantly proven by Kurt Gödel (1906-1978), no complex system of thought, even formal mathematics, can be built up from scratch and be internally fully consistent without resort to at least one external assumption or definition that cannot be definitively proven within that complex system. This is Gödel's water-tight "incompleteness theorem" (1931), and its surprising truth has to do with the contradictions necessarily encountered regarding self-referential sets. Descartes (1596-1650), for example, in his Discourse on the Methods (1637) began with the fundamental proposition, "I think, therefore I am." When considering the modern "Theory of Mind," to cite another example, one could propose that a human person is in reality just an isolated brain floating in an oxygenated physiologic solution in a vast alien experiment, and all mental experiences, sensations, interactions with other persons, etc. result from a gigantic simulation --- other persons actually have no minds at all. Alternatively, even though we cannot prove that other persons exist and have independent minds, we can reasonably assume that that is truly the case, and move ahead from there as we try to grasp "reality."
Coming to unavoidable unprovable assumptions related to cosmology, which sorts of assumptions make most sense? In science we often resort to Occam's razor -- the principle of parsimony: an explanation should be as simple as possible until a somewhat more complex explanation is actually required to fit with the facts. Krauss along with modern cosmologists seem to find that all the mass and energy in the universe apparently sum to zero, and the argument is convincing and, I think, probably true. And he also invokes a sort of anthropic principle: that humans exist because in this present universe, as opposed to many other unfavorable universes, the natural laws crystalized in forms that made human beings physically possible. But is this parsimonious? There certainly is a heavy burden of "specialness" if one believes that there has been only a single universe, this is it, and it is exactly perfect so that intelligent beings can exist and evolve. But there may be arguably an even more heavy burden to the alternative view favored by Krauss; that there are billions of parallel universes -- the "multi-verse" --- or perhaps billions of sequential universes. Krauss thinks that in nearly all of these many universes the conditions were not right for sentient beings, but in at least one very rare case, a universe came into existence that made life possible. So has there been only one universe that is unique and special, or have there been billions of random universes? My belief is that, at the present time, reasonable persons have no basis by which to settle definitively which of these assumptions is the closest to the truth. Moreover, my intuition is that it is precisely this question that is the crux of the fundamental unprovable assumption that we must make when thinking about the ultimate meaning of life -- or lack thereof. In view of Gödel, it is fully scientific and allowed for each person to consider and to make this choice of a key starting assumption, and then thereafter one must logically develop a consistent world view based on observed facts. Perhaps I am wrong, but I believe that Krauss and Dawkins should carefully think about this. Gödel is the key.
A particular aspect of Krauss' argument bothers me, however. The billions of universes are supposedly arising from nothing, and actually are nothing since in each universe the total mass and energy sums to zero. But Krauss invokes that this is possible because within quantum nothingness there are virtual particles that are rapidly entering and exiting existence. But if there is truly nothing, then how do the newly formed virtual particles "know" what characteristics to briefly assume? Must there not be "laws" to guide them? In other words, it appears that there may be "several types of nothing" -- one type is seething with virtual particles of certain types that are rapidly appearing and disappearing, but I am interested really in another type of nothing -- absolutely nothing, lacking even in the virtual particles. Can there be different types of nothing? This calls to mind the work of the German mathematician Georg Cantor (1845-1918), the expert in set theory, who proved that there were different types of infinity. He showed, for example, that the real numbers are "more numerous" than the natural numbers, even though both are infinite.
Thus, my view, in agreement with Arthur Stanley Eddington's (1882-1944) famous essay The Decline of Determinism (1935), is that we do not live in a "billiard ball" deterministic universe. Quantum mechanics allows for indeterminism, and also, in my view, free will. I tried to make such a case in my brief essay The Inherent Uncertainty of Nature Is a Basis for Religion published in The Scientist in December, 1988. Various influences that shaped my thinking have been described in a book, Chess Juggler (2011). I'll admit to being influenced over the years also by the profound insights of the philosopher Mortimer Adler (1902-2001) -- one of his many books was How to Think About God (1980). Even Isaac Newton (1642-1727) reflected philosophically in his Opticks (1704) that he wanted to learn "Whence it is that Nature doth nothing in vain; and whence arises all that Order and Beauty which we see in the World." Let me close with what the naturalist and anthropologist Loren Eiseley (1907-1977) wrote in The Immense Journey, "Rather, I would say that if `dead' matter has reared up this curious landscape of fiddling crickets, song sparrows, and wondering men, it must be plain to even the most devoted materialist that the matter of which he speaks contains amazing, if not dreadful powers, and may not impossibly be, as Hardy has suggested, `But one mask of many worn by the Great Face behind.'"
Top reviews from other countries
Ci sono passaggi anche molto amari, la mazzata finale ti arriva con la conclusione di Dawkins (che conferma l'inquietudine)
Lawrence Krause featured in many videos of 'How The Universe Works'.
This book can be compared with 'The Elegant Universe' by Brian Greene but only if you are interested in string theory.
I would prefer any reader to start from 'The Theory of Everything' by Stephen Hawking small book but with plenty of information if read properly then go for this book itself and for more knowledge go for another theory rather than General Relativity which will be string theory which can be confusing for new readers.
This book contains very fundamental topics how to define our universe in the present state which is dependant on the past.
Reviewed in India on June 15, 2019
Lawrence Krause featured in many videos of 'How The Universe Works'.
This book can be compared with 'The Elegant Universe' by Brian Greene but only if you are interested in string theory.
I would prefer any reader to start from 'The Theory of Everything' by Stephen Hawking small book but with plenty of information if read properly then go for this book itself and for more knowledge go for another theory rather than General Relativity which will be string theory which can be confusing for new readers.
This book contains very fundamental topics how to define our universe in the present state which is dependant on the past.
Der Anlass für das vorliegende Buch war eine Vorlesung, die der Autor 2009 für die Richard Dawking Foundation gehalten hat, und deren Video- Mitschnitt bald 1.5 Millionen Aufrufe erlebte; Teile davon wurden kopiert und in Debatten von sowohl atheistischen als auch theistischen Gruppen verwendet. Wegen des offensichtlich bestehenden Interesses, aber auch auf Grund der zum Teil konfusen Kommentare, reifte beim Autor die Idee, das Material in vollständigerer Form als Buch zu veröffentlichen, wie er im Vorwort erläutert; das würde ihm auch die Gelegenheit geben, Argumente hinzuzufügen, die sich auf die aktuellen Erkenntnisse auf dem Gebiet der Kosmologie stützen, und die unser Bild von Universum gründlich gewandelt haben.
Der überwiegende Teil des Buches ist einem kurzen Abriss der modernen Kosmologie gewidmet, einem Gebiet, das Albert Einstein 1916 aus der Taufe hob, als er seine Allgemeine Relativitätstheorie erstmals für ein einfaches Modell des Universums als ganzes einsetzte. Da die Gleichungen keine statischen Lösungen zuließen, analysierte Einstein nochmals seine Theorie und führte die kosmologische Konstante eine, einem Term, der eine abstoßende Wirkung des leeren Raumes (auf großen Skalen) beschreibt. Damit fand Einstein tatsächlich ein statisches Modell, dass sich aber später als instabil erwies; die dynamischen Modelle von Friedmann hielt er zunächst für unphysikalisch. Der Astronom Edwin Hubble benutzte die Cepheiden Methode, um die Entfernungen von 'nebularen' Objekten zu messen – auf Grund seiner Resultate wurden diese als eigenständige Galaxien identifiziert. Zusammen mit den Ergebnissen von M. Humason über die Rotverschiebung der Spektren von Galaxien, konnte Hubble schließlich feststellen, dass sich die meisten Galaxien von uns entfernen, mit einer Geschwindigkeit, die um so größer ist, je weiter die Galaxien entfernt sind. Lemaitre verband diese Beobachtungsresultate mit den Modellen der ART und folgerte, dass unser Universum tatsächlich expandiert. im Umkehrschluss musste es einen Anfang (Urknall) und ein endliches Alter haben. Einstein ließ sich aber erst Anfang der 1930iger Jahre von der Richtigkeit dieser Ideen überzeugen.
Eine der überzeugendsten Bestätigungen für die Urknalltheorie war die Entdeckung der kosmischen Hintergrundstrahlung (CMB) duch Penzias und Wilson 1964, diese äußerst homogene Mikrowellenstrahlung stammt aus einer Zeit, da das Universum etwa 300000 Jahre alt war, und sich auf Grund der Expansion soweit abgekühlt hatte, so dass sich Strahlung und Materie entkoppelten. Aus der exakte Vermessung der geringen Schwankungen dieser Strahlungen mit Hilfe der Satelliten COBE, WMAP und Planck, konnte unter anderen das Alter des Universum und seine Geometrie sehr genau bestimmt werden. Es erwies sich, das das Universum mit hoher Sicherheit flach ist, d.h. seine Massendichte muss sehr nahe bei der kritischen Dichte liegen. Auf Grund diesen Daten avancierte die Kosmologie nun zu einer exakten Wissenschaft.
Allerdings hielt der Kosmos noch viele Überraschungen parat, u.a. erwies sich die geschätzte Masse der sichtbaren Sterne und Galaxien als viel zu gering. Bereits Fritz Zwicky stieß bei der Vermessung der Rotationsgeschwindigleiten von Galaxien 1933 auf eine Ungereimtheit, er folgerte, dass Galaxien von einem Halo von Dunkler Materie umgeben sein müssten. In neuerer Zeit, konnte die Existenz dieser, nur durch ihre gravitative Wirkung in Erscheinung tretende, seltsamen Materie mittels des Gravitationslinsen Effekts unabhängig bewiesen werden. Doch nicht genug, in den 1990iger Jahren wollten Astronomen die Verlangsamung der Expansion des Universums messen, wie sie Standardmodell der Kosmologie vorhersagt. Das Team um Saul Perlmutter benutzte dazu Supernovae vom Typ Ia als Standardkerzen. Ihre Ergebnisse waren schockierend, statt die erwartete Verlangsamung zu erhalten, zeigt die Daten, dass sich das All sogar beschleunigt ausdehnt -- sie machten sich auf die Fehlersuche: vergessene Korrekturen, fehlerhafte Eichungen etc. – aber eine zweite Gruppe um Brian Schmidt hatte unabhängige Messung durchgeführt und war zum gleichen Schluss gekommen. Das Universum musste also aus einer noch seltsamere Komponente bestehen, die einfach Dunkle Energie genannt wurde, und die dafür zuständig ist, den Raum auseinander zu treiben – der Effekt entspricht gerade dem, der durch Einsteins kosmologische Konstante beschrieben wird. Doch woher sollte die Dunkle Energie stammen – es lang nahe, den 'leeren' Raum selbst dafür verantwortlich zu machen, der nach der Quantenfeldtheorie ein brodelnder 'See' aus virtuellen Teilchen ist – leider führte die Berechnung des Wertes der kosmologischen Konstante nach diesem Mechanismus zu einem Desaster: man lang 120 Größenordnungen daneben.
Alan Guth baute Ende der 1970iger Jahre Ideen aus der Theorie der Elementarteilchen in kosmologische Modelle ein, und fand, dass es im sehr frühen Universum es eine Phase 'falschen Vakuums' geben konnte, die eine exponentielle Expansion auslösen würden. Diesen Effekt nennt Guth kosmische Inflation, interessant ist, dass damit auf einen Schlag eine Reihe kosmologischer Probleme eine Erklärung finden würden: etwa die Flachheit des Raums und die Homogenität der Hintergrundstrahlung.
Natürlich kommt Krauss auch auf die Konsequenzen der bisher bekannten kosmologischen Modelle für die Zukunft zu sprechen, insbesondere da der Autor an einigen dieser Arbeiten beteiligt war. Unter Berücksichtigung der Rolle der Dunklen Energie sind die Aussichten für die nächsten Billionen Jahre allerdings düster: das All wird dunkel, aber sogar die Indizien für den Big Bang, wie die Hintergrundstrahlung, werden langsam verschwinden.
Mit seinem Überblick zeigt Lawrence Krauss, dass im Rahmen des Standardmodells der Kosmologie viele Aspekte der Entwicklung unseres Universums konsistent beschrieben werden, man nun sogar Fragen behandeln kann, die vor hundert Jahren noch nicht einmal formulierbar waren – vieles liegt aber auch noch im Dunkel, gerade das macht die Kosmologie in der gegenwärtigen Zeit zu einer so spannenden Wissenschaft. Ja sogar für die großen Menschheitsfragen: wieso existiert das Universum, statt einfach Nichts, wie kam es zu seiner Existenz und sind Gesetz eindeutig bestimmt – zeichnen sich nun sinnvolle Antworten ab. Auf diese eher spekulativen Themen, die in seiner eingangs erwähnten Vorlesung nur gestreift hat, die aber immerhin dem Buch seinen Titel liehen, geht der Autor in den letzten Kapitel näher ein.
Bereits Alan Guth spricht von einem Universum ex nihilo, einer Idee, die erstmals von Edward Tyron 1973 formulierte wurde: ein Universum als Vakuumfluktuation – tatsächlich kann die Gesamtenergie eines geschlossenen Universum Null sein, wenn die Energie der Materie durch die negative Energie des Gravitationsfeldes kompensiert wird, dann ist die Voraussetzung gegeben, dass ein solche Fluktuation langlebig ist, ein Inflationsmechanismus kann dafür sorgen, dass das Universum zu riesigen Dimensionen aufgelassen wird. Solche Universen können also spontan aus dem leeren Raum hervorgehen, aber was ist mit dem Raum selbst? Eine Theorie von Alexander Vilenkin geht einen Schritt weiter, nach kann ihr kann ein Universum auch bei Abwesenheit von Raum und Zeit entstehen. Zu ähnlichen Aussagen kam auch Stephen Hawking 2010 in seinem Buch 'Der große Entwurf' (engl. 'The Grand Design'). Wie der Autor betont, scheint die (vorläufige) Theorie der Quantengravitation es nahe zu legen, dass nicht nur Etwas aus Nichts entstehen kann, sondern das zwangsläufig auch verlangt – Nichts ist instabil. Das 'Nichts', von dem Krauss hier spricht, ist kein philosophischer oder theologischer Begriff, sondern Gegenstand physikalischer Theorien – solange eine einheitliche Theorie der Quantengravitation noch nicht zur Verfügung steht, müssen plausible Annäherungen herhalten, und so hat der Autor auch mit verschieden Arten von Nichts zu tun: einmal das 'Nichts' des leeren Raumes, zum anderen aber das 'Nichts' ohne Raumzeit – der Begriff wird jeweils gefasst, dass er zur Theorie passt. Die Frage, ob die physikalischen Gesetze, die unser Universum bestimmen, in irgend einer Form eindeutig bestimmt sind, oder wie Einstein es gern ausdrückte: ob Gott eine Wahl hatte, bei der Erschaffung der Welt, ist beim heutigen Erkenntnisstand, noch viel vager zu beantworten. Krauss schildert auch hier einige Ansätze: Andrei Linde und A. Velenkin entwarfen die chaotische bzw. ewige Inflation, danach findet der Urknall viele Male in Vakuum- Blasen statt, jeder schafft ein eigenes Universum, mit eigenen Gesetzen. Das ist eine der Quellen für die Idee eines Multiversums, das alle möglichen, in sich konsistenten Theorie realisiert – nach dem anthropischen Prinzip ist es dann kein Wunder, dass wir uns in einem 'passenden' Universum wieder finden, andernfalls gäbe es niemand, der sich darüber Gedanken machen könnte. Der Autor steht solchen Argumentationen, die in neuerer Zeit von Verfechtern der String Theorie und ihren gigantischen 'Landschaften' von möglichen Vakuumlösungen vertreten werden, eher skeptisch gegenüber, scheinen sie doch all' die Mühen, die Newton und sein Nachfolger, um das wirkliche Verständnis der Natur aufgebracht haben, in einem lapidaren 'everything goes' aufzulösen. Aber Krauss betont auch, dass es nicht Aufgabe des Wissenschaftlers ist, der Natur vorzuschreiben, für welche 'Variante' sie sich schließlich 'entschieden' hat; wie gerade die Geschichte der Kosmologie immer wieder gezeigt hat, hält die Natur stets wieder neue Überraschung für die Forscher bereit, wann immer neue Methoden und Technologien neue Beobachtungen ermöglichen.
Die Darstellung des Autors ist grundsätzlich allgemeinverständlich gehalten, wenn er auf die Details der verschiedenen kosmologischen Theorie eingeht, muss er natürlich Umschreibungen zu Hilfe nehmen, er vermeidet aber popularistische Verkürzung und billige Gleichnisse. Man merkt der Darstellung an, dass der Text auf einer Vorlesung beruht, dass trägt zu einem lebendigen Stil bei, andererseits hätte die Aufbereitung in Buchform, dem ganzen durchaus etwas mehr Systematik einhauchen können. Auch ist es bedauerlich, dass sowohl eine Bibliographie als auch Hinweise zur weiteren Lektüre fehlen.
Lawrence Krauss scheut sich nicht, in seiner Darstellung, auf weltanschauliche Bezüge der geschilderten Erkenntnisse und Ideen einzugehen. Das mag ein Grund für die Polarisierung sein, die seine Vorlesung und das vorliegende Buch, bewirkt haben. Dabei sollte es doch legitim sein, dass der Autor eines populär wissenschaftlichen Werks – das eben kein Lehrbuch ist, auch auf die Hintergründe seines Fachs und die Beweggründe für seine eigene Arbeit zu sprechen kommt. Bei einem Thema wie dem Universum als Ganzem, ist ein Plädoyer für eine wissenschaftliches Weltbild somit mehr als angebracht. Dass der Autor scheinbar die philosophischen Aspekte seines Themas recht einseitig behandelt, lässt sich mit einem Blick auf die Geschichte leicht verstehen: die beiden Revolutionen der physikalischen Vorstellungswelt zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts, die mit dem Advent von Relativitätstheorie und Quantenmechanik einhergingen, haben unser Wissen über Raum, Zeit und Materie in weitaus größeren Maße erweitert, als das Philosophen in rund zweitausend Jahren möglich war; umgekehrt lieferte die Philosophie kaum mehr befruchtende Impulse für die exakten Wissenschaften, seit Newton die Naturphilosophie mathematisiert hatte.
Prof Krauss' style is great for non science lay people and it's a fascinating read from start to finish. It should fundamentally change your perception of the universe and your place in it.
This book is a touch dated now and I'd love to see a Part 2 book from Prof Krauss updating further scientific advances over the past 10 years.