Well that is what is interesting about it. Every physics law is actually a metaphysical entity for Science to either demonstrate or invalidate. But first, they don’t want to call it a “metaphysical” thing, because that is associated with spiritualism. It is a reputation thing. But more importantly, to come up with a metaphysical principle requires logical thought “outside the box” but not logically irrational. How do they know when a thought is logically irrational? They don’t. They know that they must ensure that whatever thought they might construe, it must agree with whatever else they have declared demonstrated enough to call “fact” (which in some cases is not really demonstrated at all, but merely “evidenced”). Of course, if it agrees with everything that has already been declared fact, then it isn’t really “outside the box”. So in effect, they are really merely extending what they already declared so as to include more aberrant details. There is nothing wrong with that, but they seriously need to understand the metaphysics that was involved in the earlier declarations. They seem to either forget such things or perhaps simply never learned them. When it comes to original thought that is not irrational, they are clueless. They are not engineers of ontology, but technicians attempting to expand on what got started years earlier.
The end result is that they make absurd guesses about the nature of reality and apply accepted scientific principles to make it seem as though it is a scientific theory, when in fact, it is often merely childishness, no different than a car mechanic speculating about the nature of combustion. The car mechanic has a better chance of understanding the details than the total novice, but that is still a far cry from the automotive design engineer (the metaphysicist).
When it comes to reality, scientists are merely attempting to reverse engineer what is already there. So naturally they examine it as closely as they can. And they become very good at such examining. But logically deducing where it all came from is simply not their talent. That talent is in the realm of pure metaphysics, not examination, measurement, and experiment.
It seems that the world is seriously lacking in people capable of rational deduction. I could get into why that is the case, but believe me, it is deeply dark and negative.
So yes, they started with metaphysics, but eventually got drawn into pure fantasy. Basically they are egocentrically groping. Being once proud of Science, it is all more than a little embarrassing to hear some of the things they profess as “Science” merely because there is mathematics involved or some flaky experiment.
In the case of Krauss, it is purely a game to sell books, claim respect over religion, and gain fame. In the case of Dawkins, it seems to be just simple stupidity.
The issue of “nothingness” is NOT anything Science can experiment with, demonstrate, or seemingly even comprehend. But it takes an actual metaphysicist/philosopher to realize that. Those who demand that only Science can know anything, who are very many, are merely preventing anyone else from solving the real problems of the day.
Nothingness is actually a logical impossibility. It doesn’t take any Science to realize that. It takes deductive reasoning, “metaphysics”. Science can’t test such impossibility. But it takes metaphysics to even realize that. Thus they spend time and money looking for ridiculous reasons for why the universe exists all the while trying to save face and maintain egocentric notions of superiority and being the “all wise” who should be given authority to govern the world. It is ridiculous.
