you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

all this is very easy for a Christian or Jew, by the way, but the believers in Scientism won't have that explanation!

[–]Hel 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

I mean personally I believe the universe is eternal, so obviously if there was a “Big Bang” it wasn’t THE beginning just the furthest back we can deduce.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Entropy increases in a closed system, so the eternal universe needs something outside the universe to keep it going.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Why do you suppose it should be a closed system ? Asking for a friend.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

If it weren’t a closed system, that would mean scientifically there is something outside of it as an energy source. Energy is not conserved if it were an open system.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Correct. So what is your reason to make this assumption ? I'm curious.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It’s what atheists typically assert. Reductio ad absurdum mostly. They will not recognize that something not physical or greater than the universe exists.

If the universe were a closed system, it could not be eternal, due to the laws of thermodynamics.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I thought we had long established the plausibility of the multiverse, that big bang's could well be occurring frequently beyond our mere known universe? Ours is only a few billion years old after all.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Does this multiverse thing follow the laws of physics? If so, just call the universe bigger and apply the same logic. If not, you’re just positing things to avoid aknowledging a higher power.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It's typical too of a theist as well as an atheist to limit themselves to what can be seen. Our small planet in a modest solar system on the edge of an average galaxy is sat within the universe as we know it, but this is only what we can comprehend. M-theory has proposed 10 or 11 spacial dimensions and could explain the existence of an infinite number of multiverses existing simultaneously, they may even exist with different laws of physics to that which we currently understand. If anything, this would make it even less likely that there be a higher power at play, and more likely that our knowledge is merely inferior due to our limitations of dimensional perception. For all we know, the universe is just one neuron of the brain in an enormous space goat, and the higher power you speak of is that very goat.

[–]Hel 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

You think there’s “something outside the universe” that’s increasing the entropy of the universe?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Either the physical universe is a closed system or an open system. If it is a closed system, it couldn’t be eternal because of the heat death paradox, and so it had a beginning. If it is an open system, it’s eternity is explained by something outside it supplying energy so it doesn’t die a heat death.

Either way we look at a complete explanation for the physical universe resides outside itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_paradox

[–]Hel 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Not being able to explain something about the universe will never prove there is something outside the universe. That’s a classic argument from ignorance.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Learn logic dude. That was a reductio ad absurdem. That was also a dilemna. Might I recommend the book Socratic Logic?

[–]Hel 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

a complete explanation for the physical universe resides outside itself

This conclusion to your reductio ad absurdem is the argument from ignorance, so we can conclude you made a mistake somewhere. How long is it going to take you to reread Socratic Logic?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The Laws of Thermodynamics shows that our universe can only be eternal if energy is added somehow. And if it is not eternal it had a beginning.

Do you believe the laws of thermodynamics don’t apply to this universe?

[–]Hel 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

ELI5 why The Laws of Thermodynamics require the heat death of the universe.