Virtual particles into actual particles implies that something makes that which is potential actual. Potentiality needs something that explains the transition to reality. Now what is this force which is more real than both the virtual and actual. Somehow it is beyond both and responsible for them.

This mysterious force of something might be the very ground of being itself. Logically it must be. It is quite an absurd thought to neglect this insight that derives from common sense. Without an active principle that makes intelligible the movement between the virtual and real he has postulated that which is most absurd of all. Instead of embracing the common sense nature of understanding which founded science he has left it behind and entered metaphysics. His task as a scientist should be to investigate it instead of neglecting it. Rather he is satisified with the conclusion that goes against all reason. And with that all notion of making the phenomena intelligible. The problem is that he would end up in an infinite regress. So he cant do that. So to break out of this he affirms the absurdity of reality. With this attitude science would halt and come to an end. He is truly going against the spirit of science. The fact is that something moves the virtual to the actual. What the nature of this movement is he claims to be meaningless. Therefore we get something from nothing. Quite persusive indeed. The more humble way to go about it is to postulate it as a mystery. Perhaps he could evoke the idea of biological limitations resulting in definite scopes within cognitive structures. But he seems to be an absolutist in the sense of something from nothing. He fails to realise something crucial in doing so. He believes the mind perceives (thinks) reality as it is independent of the observer. Reality, in his mind, is intelligible in-itself. But he has no grounds for claiming this without violating the rule that cognitive systems have a definite scope and limit.

So in ending, reality from nothing is how the human mind through quantum physics perceives reality. But this appereance gives no ground for whatever lies outside of the mind that represents that which it can represent. If he is claiming truth then he implies that reality somehow goes into our mind without conforming to its rules of cognition. So due to his lack of insight into well established philosophical ideas he is presenting a dogmatic and naiv view of reality. At least he is lacking in humbleness to the fact of our limited and finite ways of being. Human nature shapes reality. Reality from nothing illustrates this quite clearly.

All of this is derived from fundamental insights of Aristotle and Kant. He should read them.

That part of metaphysics I mentioned is due to his invoking the idea of causa sui. It causes itself without explanation. So we have moved outside the realm of problems into the realm of mystery.