How can something come from nothing?

Then there's the money side; both my parents were tobacco junkies and chunks of their money went on smoking.
As a result we never had a TV until I was about 8, and we never ever had a phone. I longed for a childrens encyclopaedia and other books but all they bought me were cheap comics.
Our elderly gran lived alone with just a radio for company and they never bought her a TV.
So yeah money on tobacco or any other drug would be much better spent on families.

Like the Phoenix Belief will rise from the ashes, or hate, and un-belief. You will know the word.

Has anybody answered this yet because it certainly beats me..
For example here's a typical atom, did it just blink into existence out of nowhere, or has it always existed, or what?

You are asking questions that physicists/scientists are still seeking for answers. What makes you think any member of a2k has the ability to answer questions even those who study this topic is unable to?

I thought scientists knew the answers to everything?..

Is that the reason why you ask ignorant questions?

Why are you asking FM and Ci about that? They don't know. They don't have the vaguest idea of what has happened - whether the atom has always existed or has been created (pay attention) through the evolution of the stars by the big bang ... of course, which is the master-mind of everything in the universe. They cannot even explain you why the Universe is at one and the same age in the center (where the big bang has been 13.8 billion years ago) and along the periphery (where the big bang is 'doing the housework' right now).
Those guys will never confess that they don't know, for this sentence does not even exist in 'science'. Instead of that they will start throwing at you some ad hominems that they have at hand in he moment. WFM.

Haha yes, that's why religion makes scientists go red in the face and pout, because they won't admit they don't know if there's a God or not!
So they take the easy way out and simply say "God doesn't exist"..
Set 'em straight Mr Data-

How else to get an answer from a genius?

If you can't answer them just say "I don't know" mate..

It's not so much that I don't know, but scientists don't know either. Your questions are ignorant, because you fail to understand what science is.

Don't let my old science teacher hear you mate, he coached me into College of Preceptors exam passes in General Science and Advanced Science in 1963, I know how to make copper sulphate crystals and split atoms with the best of 'em..

I'm not here to impress your science teacher; I'm here to challenge your opinions and questions about what is known in the sciences.

Diversion from the primary discussion is childish. How old are you?

There's a lot science doesn't know, and a lot it DOES know; problem is scientists like to think they know it all.
For example for years they said the universe was expanding but slowing down, but more recently they're saying it's expanding but accelerating, wish they'd make up their minds..

You wrote,

Where in the world did you come up with such an ignorant opinion? No wonder you're confused! It only proves you don't know what science is.

Romeo...

...ci makes a cottage industry of calling people stupid, ignorant, idiots, morons, confused and the like.

He does it to everyone...apparently it makes him feel better about himself.

Do not think you are special because he does it to you so often.

Frank.
Even CI is right sometimes

As a --ahem-- champion wargamer, I respect and admire the samurai blood coursing through Cicerone's veins,
and as an old samurai maxim is- "Take arrows in your front, never in your back",
I'm quite happy to help him achieve it..

"The Lord made my mouth a sharp sword, an arrow in his quiver" (Isaiah 49:1/2)

     There is no way for you to know that. The omniscience is unattainable and as a scientist, as you are presenting yourself to be, you should have known that.
     I have noticed that there are a lot of scientists (and people presenting themselves as scientists) ... and also politicians, and their para-military servants that may know much more than you can possibly imagine for them to know. Besides that they may interpret the things in a lot of distorted ways.
     Not all scientific reports are published. The greater part of the information remains 'for internal use only'. Almost nothing of the intra-corporate innovations and findings is published.
     Very few of the reports of clinical trials, on medications for example, are published - most of them remain top secret in benefit of the pharmaceutical companies ... thus exposing at (unnecessary) risk the consumers and preserving the shamelessly high profits from the 'regular customers' flow ... and also in benefit of the guys from the psychotronics for 'security purposes' (whatever this might mean).
     In 20 years, when the classification denotement is expired, the documents are scheduled for destruction (actually moved to another data storehouse, from where they can be used by anyone who pays the most). You don't even know how much of the information might have had such fate.
     Hence, the much more honest statement would be 'I don't know' ... and 'if FM does not know it either, there is no way for any scientist to know it' (which would be an arbitrary statement made on the grounds of insufficient and incomplete information ... and incorrect assumptions). Anyway.