The Universe Did Not Just Pop Into Existence

Behind particles ‘popping into
existence’ lies a deeper challenge
for cosmological evolution

 

What’s Popping?
The Limits of Quantum Fluctuation Explanations

by Dr. Sarah Buckland-Reynolds

Behind particles ‘popping into existence’ by quantum fluctuations lies a deeper challenge for cosmological evolution. While particles may appear from energy, what explains the origin of energy, laws, and fields?

In dialogue with atheists or agnostics at university, when the topic of the universe’s origins came up in conversations, the ‘go-to’ explanation was always “quantum fluctuations.” Whether or not that atheist had a background in Physics, the appeal to “quantum fluctuations” has become a scapegoat answer thought to provide a satisfying explanation for a lack of belief that a Supreme Creator is necessary for the creation of the world.

A recent headline from the popular ScienceDaily outlet brought these conversations back to mind: Quantum computer simulates matter “popping into existence.” This was based on the journal article titled:

String-breaking dynamics in a quantum simulator (De et al, Nature Physics, September 23, 2026). From the outset, the headlines (especially the popular commentary) seem to suggest that physicists have finally proven that particles can appear spontaneously and thus provide a naturalistic explanation for the origin of the universe. But is this really the case?

Nothing Comes from Nothing!

“Nothing comes from nothing, nothing ever could!” is a line from a popular musical; but it speaks to a profound question that is relevant to some of the most complex phenomena that physicists continue to grapple with: Why is there something rather than nothing?

In one of the most recent attempts at examining one of the mechanisms popularly referenced to answer this question, Arinjoy De and colleagues used a programmable trapped-ion quantum computer to simulate a phenomenon known as string breaking (simply put, a process where energy stored between particles is converted into new particles) – or as described in ScienceDaily, it is a process

“…in which two connected building blocks of matter are pulled apart until so much energy accumulates that new particles can effectively “pop into existence” when the connection breaks.”

In their simulation, De et al’s team created a controllable quantum system consisting of 13 trapped ions and investigated how energy stored in a simulated “string” connecting charges could lead to the formation of additional charge pairs. Their experiments revealed evidence of a previously unrecognized mechanism of string breaking and demonstrated how quantum simulators are becoming powerful tools for studying how matter behaves and may help scientists explore ideas about the early universe.

While the study merely described simulated mechanisms, the widespread interpretation of such work often extends far beyond what the experiment itself demonstrates. Although some headlines portrayed the work as showing matter “popping into existence”, it exaggerates what the researchers actually observed. So, what was observed?

The Observations

For one, the experiment did not create matter from absolute nothingness. Instead, the system already contained trapped ions, laser beams, stored energy, quantum fields, a carefully engineered Hamiltonian (the mathematical rule that describes the total energy of a system and how that system changes over time) and scientists directing and controlling every aspect of the experiment. In fact, quoting from the ScienceDaily article, the authors described “precise” and “controlled” conditions to view this phenomenon. In their words (bold and italics added for emphasis):

“Quantum simulators are especially useful for this kind of work because researchers can precisely control them and program them to imitate physical processes that occur at atomic and subatomic scales… “Working at the intersection of quantum simulation and high-energy physics is incredibly exciting,” said Arinjoy De, first author on the paper, former PhD student in Monroe’s lab and now production machine lead at QuEra Computing. “By simulating quark confinement and string-breaking phenomena in a controlled lab environment, we’re opening up new pathways for experimental investigations into the behavior of matter at its most fundamental level.””

Far from sounding like proof for undirected naturalistic origins of matter, the precisions required to even view one particle appearing from existing energy seems to require much intentionality and pre-designed conditions! If scientists must carefully design and control every aspect of a quantum simulator to reproduce these phenomena, how did the extraordinarily precise conditions required for such particle-forming processes arise in the universe itself?

If scientists must carefully design and control every aspect of a quantum simulator to reproduce these phenomena, how did the extraordinarily precise conditions required for such particle-forming processes arise in the universe itself?

The point that many atheists fail to reveal is that particle-like excitations that appear in such experiments emerged within an already existing physical framework possessing both energy and structure.

This does not solve the problem of the origin of matter. As the energy from which these particles are said to emerge is subject to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, usable energy becomes increasingly unavailable over time, thus indicating starting at a point in time. This suggests that the universe has not existed eternally.

For matter to arise following physical laws after that starting point, it suggests that the universe had highly ordered initial conditions! What sparked that starting point continues to not be explained by physical laws. Note that the existence of mathematically precise laws themselves is another problem not resolved by quantum fluctuations.

Therefore, even with the very processes of quantum fluctuation, we return to the same point: since quantum fluctuations require pre-existing quantum fields, laws, and energy, the deeper question therefore remains: why do these exist at all? Logically, this points to the need for a Cause beyond the physical universe itself.

Redefining ‘Nothing’: Where Did Energy Come From?

While we established that De et al’s (2026) experiment did not address the origin of energy, the paper’s core question was: How can energy within a pre-existing physical system be converted into particles?

De et al (2026) set the simulation with already existing raw materials and precise conditions being used in the simulation. For example, the authors explicitly describe the process in terms of energy stored within a confining field where, as two charges are separated, energy accumulates in the connecting string eventually converting into particle-antiparticle pairs. Since their simulation began with precise conditions already existing, their work does not support atheistic explanations of the universe.

This is where many popular discussions of quantum origins encounter significant problems. Advocates of cosmological evolution frequently appeal to quantum phenomena such as vacuum fluctuations, where it is suggested that particles naturally emerge from the quantum vacuum and that the universe itself emerged in a similar fashion. However, what is usually done in such arguments is a bait and switch fallacy, where the term “nothing” is often redefined. In quantum field theory, a vacuum is not nothing.’ Rather, it is a rich physical state possessing:

• Quantum fields
• Mathematical structure
• Physical laws
• Energy properties
• Space-time relationships

Non-creationist Physicist David Albert famously criticized claims that quantum fluctuations explain creation from nothing, noting that a quantum vacuum is emphatically not “nothing” but rather a highly structured physical reality. The question therefore remains: Why do those quantum fields exist at all? Explaining particles by invoking quantum fields merely pushes the problem back one level.

The Cosmological Argument Remains

This issue has long been recognized by physicists themselves. As frequently mentioned in previous articles published by Creation–Evolution Headlines, astronomer Robert Jastrow, founder of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observed the growing tension between cosmological discoveries and philosophical naturalism.

In one of his most famous reflections (God and the Astronomer), Jastrow wrote:

“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; and as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”

While Jastrow’s broader point was not to support Christianity itself, he emphasized that modern cosmology increasingly points toward a universe with a beginning. With this established, the logic pointing to the existence of a Creator beyond the universe comes very easily:

• A beginning immediately raises the question of causation.
• Anything that begins to exist requires an explanation for its existence.

As De et al’s (2026) article shows, quantum fluctuations do not remove that problem because fluctuations themselves require an existing quantum reality in which those fluctuations occur.

Pointing to He who was, is, and is to come

While popular headlines referencing De et al’s work appear to suggest that matter can randomly ‘pop’ into existence, closer scrutiny shows that this is not the case, and that, in fact, such simulations require precise guidance. While physicists continue to attempt naturalistic explanations, the Bible’s account already heralds that the universe had a beginning, and an Eternal Cause that is not bound by physical laws. Beginning with the declaration of Ultimate Causation, the Bible says: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) Similarly, Hebrews 11:3 states:

“Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”

While De et al’s (2026) new study provides a fascinating glimpse into the behaviour of matter under extreme conditions, it does not eliminate the question of origins, but arguably sharpens it. From a creation perspective, the deepest mystery is not that matter can emerge from energy under certain conditions, rather, the fact that the universe is governed by elegant mathematics, information-rich laws, and astonishing fine-tuning exists at all is enough evidence to point to an Intelligent Transcendent Cause beyond the universe itself, whose existence provides a sufficient cause for the universe and its laws.

---

Dr. Sarah Buckland-Reynolds is a Christian, Jamaican, Environmental Science researcher, and journal associate editor. She holds the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Geography from the University of the West Indies (UWI), Mona with high commendation, and a postgraduate specialization in Geomatics at the Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia. The quality of her research activity in Environmental Science has been recognized by various awards including the 2024 Editor’s Award from the American Meteorological Society for her reviewing service in the Weather, Climate and Society Journal, the 2023 L’Oreal/UNESCO Women in Science Caribbean Award, the 2023 ICETEX International Experts Exchange Award for study in Colombia. and with her PhD research in drought management also being shortlisted in the top 10 globally for the 2023 Allianz Climate Risk Award by Munich Re Insurance, Germany. Motivated by her faith in God and zeal to positively influence society, Dr. Buckland-Reynolds is also the founder and Principal Director of Chosen to G.L.O.W. Ministries, a Jamaican charitable organization which seeks to amplify the Christian voice in the public sphere and equip more youths to know how to defend their faith.