Why Can't Something Come from Nothing?

INTERVIEWER: Let's talk about this. On your website, ReasonableFaith.org, because I do do my research, I found you gave three justifications for this first premise. Reminding the listeners – the first premise is: Everything that begins to exist has a cause. Now, the three justifications you give (with a bit of explanation) but just the first line is: firstly, that something cannot come from nothing; secondly, that if something can come from nothing then it is inexplicable why just anything and everything doesn't come into existence from nothing (will come into being from nothing), and the third point is, and I quote, “Common experience and scientific evidence confirm the truth of premise one.” What kind of common experience are you talking about when you say that?

DR. CRAIG: Everyday experience, scientific experience. We always look for causes of events. That's the whole project of science. And we never come across things coming into being uncaused. Now, immediately people will think about quantum indeterminacy – that there seem to be events that, on at least the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, are uncaused. But two things here need to be said. The argument is very carefully worded. It does not say every “event” has a cause. It says everything that begins to exist has a cause. So the argument is quite consistent with quantum indeterminacy and there being uncaused events. What it says is that there can't be things – substances – that come into being without a cause. And then the second thing that I would say is that the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum indeterminacy is by no means the only or the most plausible interpretation of quantum mechanics. There are at least 10 different physical interpretations of the equations of quantum mechanics, and some of these are as fully deterministic as non-quantum theory. So it's not a proven counter-example in any case.