Can Logic Disprove the Necessity of a First Cause?

  • Thread starter ƒ(x)
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Logic
In summary, the conversation discussed different cases for the original cause of the universe and questioned whether or not a god was involved. The idea of a "first force" was brought up, but the concept of causation was also challenged. The use of "god" as a term was debated, with some arguing it was being used for familiarity while others questioned its appropriateness. Ultimately, the discussion highlighted the difficulty in discussing abstract concepts and the importance of semantics in debates about truth.
  • #36
skippy1729 said:
There is a (very speculative) physical model of this "Can the universe create itself?" by Gott and Li, published in a peer reviewed journal (Physical Review D) available at http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9712344. Paper is very technical but there is a nice picture at http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/ps/9712/9712344v1.fig1.gif
.

The wormhole part of the paper is not convincing. Yes, GR modelling allows their CTCs, but equally, CTCs would conflict with thermodynamic modelling.

Even in GR, without some exotic mechanism, a wormhole would pinch off instantly. Though perhaps "instantly" is still slow enough for their approach.

On the other hand, their description of the early universe as a highly symmetric fuzz of CTCs - an extension of the imaginary time Hartle/Hawking idea - is the kind of concept I mean by vagueness. A foam of possibility where direction is as yet undefined.

Not only does the south pole not have meaning, but east lies symmetrically in all directions (being identical still to west). It needs a symmetry breaking in the direction of north to also make all the other directions distinct.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
This question of 'does god exist' is what has drawn me to do physics at university level, and this thread has given me some food for thought.

This makes sense to me, maybe not you, but I am thinking aloud here...

Of course this question is beyond our current intelligence, just like we can't work out what makes us conscious or how the brain and imagination and our infinite memory works.

Re: Big bang, it came from something, and that something came from something too, just as 'god' came from something and so on, to me god is 'infinity' until I know better. It's like infinite self replication but gathering intelligence in the form of different 'mechanisms' of being along the way, the big bang being one of them, and the whole 'creation of living souls' the other. Whatever 'time' is, we need to think of these stages as this 'god gathers' intelligence and mechanisms 'over' time.

Then we get back to the idea as to whether time is infinite, 'infinite' being it has no end, and therefore has no beginning, so there must be some kind CTC, this mechanism being a stage of how god gathers intelligence to make himself appear infinite after the big bang.

But at the moment, all I can logically assume is that this universe is inside another universe, that at the moment we cannot enter (blackholes?) What is the fabric of intelligence inside this outer universe? Does 'our god' represent a sentient being in this outer universe? Maybe our universe is just a scientific experiment within that universe created by 'god', and he is the same for an outer universe for his existence etc.

Which brings us back to the infinite cycle of existence.

Something else that also needs asking is if god is a sentient being within an outer universe then do we have the intelligence to work out such matter... if you built a robot, would it be able to work out how itself works or how he is 'concious', let alone who or what built it.

Personally I think the more we can work out about our own inner workings (brain, conciousness etc) only then we can begin to imagine how our creator designed us and then who 'he' really is, and then 'where' he is, and 'why' he made us. But I don't think 'life forms' as we know it was programmed to ever have the intelligence to even comprehend the idea of it's creator.

One final though, we are our parents kids etc etc, it's a cycle... just like the idea of a CTC, it's self replication.

And I can't think any more about it at the moment.
 
  • #38
pallidin said:
So, is there a God or not?

Yes.
 
  • #39
I agree. Although I can't prove it.
 
  • #40
I submit that there is a Case C to include with cases A and B mentioned prior below...

Case C: There was in fact an original cause. However, if prior to that orignial cause there was an obsolute void of both time and space, then I would conclude that it would be not only possible, but probably likely, to have an orignial cause without a prior cause. In this case, an endless loop would not apply since time did not exist as well as space.

Lisi, Hawking, LHC and others are doing important work, but even after Higgs particle is explained and proven, it will still leave this question unanswered.
..................

Starting question: What was the original cause that started everything, how can there be an original cause without god?



Case A: There was no original cause; the universe always was and always will be.
Result: No god.

Case B: There was an original cause. Then what caused the original cause? Another cause would lead to an infinite loop and achieve nothing, so the original cause must always have existed. Why couldn't the universe have always existed, it would be illogical to think otherwise?
Result: No god.[/QUOTE]
 
  • #41
deian said:
I agree. Although I can't prove it.

I believe a dragon lives in my garage but I can't prove that either. Sorry.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
45
Views
5K
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
4K
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
30
Views
3K
Replies
36
Views
7K
Back
Top