Over the past few months, a controversy has erupted between members of the fields of physics and philosophy. It all started in January when Lawrence Krauss, a well-known cosmologist and science writer, published his book titled
A Universe from Nothing: Why There is Something Rather than Nothing. Krauss' book attempts to show how the universe could have come from "nothing," as implied by quantum field theory.
Significant hype accompanied the book. In the afterword for the book, noted atheist and biologist Richard Dawkins
compares the book to Charles Darwin's most famous work:
"
If On the Origin of Species was biology’s deadliest blow to supernaturalism, we may come to see A Universe from Nothing as the equivalent from cosmology. The title means exactly what it says. And what it says is devastating."
Several months after the book's publication, David Albert, a philosopher of science at Columbia University, wrote a
scathing critique in the New York Times.
Quickly, the debate degenerated into personal attacks. In an
interview with
The Atlantic several weeks later, Krauss derided the "moronic philosophers that have written about my book."
He also said, "Philosophy is a field that, unfortunately, reminds me of that old Woody Allen joke, 'those that can't do, teach, and those that can't teach, teach gym.' And the worst part of philosophy is the philosophy of science."
He's wrong, and several famous physicists would agree that philosophy can play an important role in understanding scientific results.
Read the rest of the post . . .