Slimebeast said:
The_vagabond7 said:
Slimebeast said:
Soleron said:
Slimebeast said:
You've read Dawkins too much. He doesn't address the problem of the first cause (as much as he should for a person that attacks theism as much as he does). The fallacy of tribe religions throughout history in this world doesn't disqualify God.
It boils down to something very simple though - the first cause. Stuff don't come out of nothing without a reason. I'm sure you as a former zealot has asked many times - where did we come from? Why and how is there anything - there shouldn't be any stuff! And by all logic there must be a reason.
Multiverse is a horrible invention to address that problem. It's insulting. But it's the only explanation if you can't accept a God as an explanation. (because just like the guy in the article argued, multiverse is the only plausible natural mechanistic cause to explain why the universe came to being 13.5 billion years ago and not 13.500000000000000000000001 years ago or any other number you can come up with)
|
The fact that science does not currently have an explanation for how the universe began doesn't mean God is a default, or even plausible explanation. Any believer still has to show that God is a sound, testable hypothesis.
The multiverse is not the only possible scientific theory that would explain how the universe began. A single large-scale quantum fluctuation (see vacuum energy*) would fulfil the 'something from nothing' criterion.
*Simple explanation: Because we can't measure the energy of the vacuum precisely, it could have any energy value at all. With a very large amount of time to work with, it will eventually have an energy value large enough to create the universe. This energy is then converted into particles, etc. in a Big Bang event.
|
I fail to see how this quantum fluctuation explanation is plausible.
It's still a timed event that needs a cause.
|
As the fellows article contends, prior to the universe there was no such thing as time. As such there would only be a single unchanging moment. As such there could be only one moment that a mechanistic cause could take place. Seeing as how that means there is only a single possibility, why does it require decision to happen at a certain time? There is no time.
|
He failed to explain that in a clear way.
The way I see it is this: there must be a good explanation of why the universe came to be 13.5 billion years ago and not in any other time. An explanation that gives a specific reason why it isn't 13.50000000001 billion years old or any other numbers. Only God and multiverse theory can do that, since the universe isn't eternal.
And multiverse is a ridiculous explanation, it's just laughable that there would be 1000's of Slimebeasts out there living a near perfect copy of my life.
|
That's just a matter of our perception. If the universe ever began (and it did obviously) then at some point it would have to be 13.5 billion years old, and eventually it will be 13.5000001 billion years old. We just happen to be living at the point that it's 13.5 billion years old. It can only be one age at any given time if it began, and we are living at the time it is the age it is now. If it was 12.7 billion years old instead what would that prove? That we gained sentience a billion years quicker and that's all.
If there was no time before the universe then the universe could only begin at one moment, there could be no random time that it begins because there was only a single timeless moment before it began. It is 13.5 billion years old instead of 13.6 because it inevitably had to be 13.5 billion years old at some point and we just happen to be living at that time.
Just because something happens one way instead of another doesn't imply providence. It just implies that it happened that way instead of another and that another could just as easily have been true but isn't because only one thing can happen. If I roll a dice and it lands on 5 instead of 3 that doesn't mean "it could only have been 5 by providence, why wasn't it a 3 instead"? Just because we are living at a time when the universe is 13.5 billion years old instead of 13.6 doesn't mean that it required concious choice for it to be this way. Only that the universe began and we are living now instead of later or earlier.
