A lot of cute straw men and non sequiturs all lined up in a row. It's quite easy to provide "logical" proofs for whatever you like if you are the only one talking. 0/10
heinsenberg uncertainty principle : if you don't know the energy value in a certain space/time, it can have energy value, therefore something from nothing, therefore matter from energy value, therefore the universe: stupid video about a fucktard christian thinking he knows everything there is to know to prove/disrpove science/religion. please put your body through a meat grinder
Time is relative. Meaning that time began to exist with the Big Bang, or possibly before but we can't possibly know anything about a timeframe before the Big Bang anyway...
the first thing u hit us with was a binary (either or)fallacy, "either everything came from nothing, or something was always there and created everything"
another thing i want to address is your definition of eternal. u basically relate finite pieces of matter to infinity saying matter must be finite, and therefore not eternal. the law of conservation tells us that matter cannot be created or destroyed, only altered. what if space and matter just always existed? that was an option you missed.
You must have not watched anything after that, because the video explains how that is impossible.
If the universe is eternal then time (the measure of cause & effect events) has always existed and always will exist. However, you cannot have an infinite regression of time, because if there were an infinite amount of cause & effect events before right now then we would have never reached this moment in time. Basically, the law of causality disproves the eternal universe hypothesis.
@cbproducktions no, i watched the whole thing, but the definition of time is "the system of those sequential relations that any event has to any other, as past, present, or future; indefinite and continuous duration regarded as that in which events succeed one another." which is not the same as your cause and effect idea for time. and also, an infinite amount of cause and effect wouldn't stop the progression of time, and time doesn't cannot backwards.
Time has multiple definitions, just like many other words have multiple meanings. However, whatever source you pasted that definition of time is essentially the same definition the video gives, except the video puts it in simpler terms.
Never did I nor the video claim that an infinite amount of cause & effect events would stop the progression of time. Simply, you can't have an infinite amount of time before right now. I am repeating myself. The light switch analysis puts it simply.
Based off patterns in nature and logical reasoning all signs point to a Creator. I do agree there is so much we, as humans, don't know about. But to dismiss both scientific laws (causality in this case) and logic altogether, just because we don't know everything is silly (no disrespect), as neither fields, and humanity in result would never progress.
@twinafhell Blind faith is Not necessary, you have the Law & the prophets, the law shows that od knows what he is talking about & that you are not good though you believe the law is good(thou shalt not murder)
but even more tangable than that is you have the prphets, mere man in no way coukd make so many 100% accurate prophecies & that proves God must be & that he is outside the time realm as he has pointed out :-)
no physics were not the same before the bigbang so everything comeing from nothing is possible and yeh both could have existed forever u just cant fit eternity in ur head it is possible everything could lead back to the beggining
Things are either necessary or contingent. If they do not contain the reason for their own existence, they are contingent. Contingent things depend on their existence from other things. The universe does not contain the reason for its existence - there is no firm reason why it should exist. It is contingent and so must depend on something else for its existence. The argument is there must be a necessary being for existence to be founded, that is God.
When it comes to the beginning of the universe using our normal logic doesn't make sense since we evolved that logic during a time long after the big bang, we do not have the faculty's to think about the big bang with just normal logic. We need to resort to mathematics to understand the big bang. This kid never proves an infinite regress is not possibles and that the universe could have been it's own first cause.
The universe is composed of finite properties that God isn't composed of/bound to.
Every effect has a cause. That's the law of causality. The earth being here has a cause, that cause is an effect of another cause, and so forth. It would be illogical for one to conclude that there has been an infinite amount of cause and effect events before right now because we would have never reached this current event. It's simply impossible for there to be an infinite regress of cause and effect events.
If it does, it also refutes God, as he logically occupies the exact same role as an eternal universe.
Also, we don't actually know that causality is a universal principle. It's something we infer inductively on the macro level. If quantum uncertainty is a fundamental part of nature, then even "something from nothing" may be a possibility through mechanisms like the Hartle-Hawking state. Of course, that also excludes the idea of "nothing" as totally inert as a possibility in nature.
A lot of cute straw men and non sequiturs all lined up in a row. It's quite easy to provide "logical" proofs for whatever you like if you are the only one talking. 0/10
lordshamus 2 months ago
heinsenberg uncertainty principle : if you don't know the energy value in a certain space/time, it can have energy value, therefore something from nothing, therefore matter from energy value, therefore the universe: stupid video about a fucktard christian thinking he knows everything there is to know to prove/disrpove science/religion. please put your body through a meat grinder
its9001 2 months ago
Time is relative. Meaning that time began to exist with the Big Bang, or possibly before but we can't possibly know anything about a timeframe before the Big Bang anyway...
cahomad 3 months ago
Comment removed
bekpilot 4 months ago
Just because we think of intelligent design, it doesn't mean divinity.
pmazz4554 10 months ago
TIME IS NOT MATTER! TIME IS AN IDEA! IDEAS HAVE NO FINITE RESTRAINTS! IT IS FORMLESS!
kurosakiichigo2 1 year ago
@kurosakiichigo2
Time is the measure of change in matter. Time it is not matter. Pay attention ; )
cbproducktions 1 year ago
the first thing u hit us with was a binary (either or)fallacy, "either everything came from nothing, or something was always there and created everything"
another thing i want to address is your definition of eternal. u basically relate finite pieces of matter to infinity saying matter must be finite, and therefore not eternal. the law of conservation tells us that matter cannot be created or destroyed, only altered. what if space and matter just always existed? that was an option you missed.
linkman91 1 year ago
@linkman91
You must have not watched anything after that, because the video explains how that is impossible.
If the universe is eternal then time (the measure of cause & effect events) has always existed and always will exist. However, you cannot have an infinite regression of time, because if there were an infinite amount of cause & effect events before right now then we would have never reached this moment in time. Basically, the law of causality disproves the eternal universe hypothesis.
cbproducktions 1 year ago
@cbproducktions no, i watched the whole thing, but the definition of time is "the system of those sequential relations that any event has to any other, as past, present, or future; indefinite and continuous duration regarded as that in which events succeed one another." which is not the same as your cause and effect idea for time. and also, an infinite amount of cause and effect wouldn't stop the progression of time, and time doesn't cannot backwards.
linkman91 11 months ago
@linkman91
Time has multiple definitions, just like many other words have multiple meanings. However, whatever source you pasted that definition of time is essentially the same definition the video gives, except the video puts it in simpler terms.
Never did I nor the video claim that an infinite amount of cause & effect events would stop the progression of time. Simply, you can't have an infinite amount of time before right now. I am repeating myself. The light switch analysis puts it simply.
cbproducktions 11 months ago
@cbproducktions
To be honest, we know nothing. You can't just say that there is a "God" that created eveything ok?
twinafhell 1 year ago
@twinafhell
Based off patterns in nature and logical reasoning all signs point to a Creator. I do agree there is so much we, as humans, don't know about. But to dismiss both scientific laws (causality in this case) and logic altogether, just because we don't know everything is silly (no disrespect), as neither fields, and humanity in result would never progress.
cbproducktions 1 year ago
@twinafhell Blind faith is Not necessary, you have the Law & the prophets, the law shows that od knows what he is talking about & that you are not good though you believe the law is good(thou shalt not murder)
but even more tangable than that is you have the prphets, mere man in no way coukd make so many 100% accurate prophecies & that proves God must be & that he is outside the time realm as he has pointed out :-)
ncwdane 5 months ago
Amen.
GodLovesUs100 1 year ago
haha my video has more views than urs
ADHDsloth 2 years ago
Nice series of sophisms. Thanks, I will give theese as example from now on.
salahhe 2 years ago
yhis has failed to provide enough evidence that the idea infinity is not importable into the physical world
ghjurx452 2 years ago
Comment removed
Alex618mir 2 years ago
no physics were not the same before the bigbang so everything comeing from nothing is possible and yeh both could have existed forever u just cant fit eternity in ur head it is possible everything could lead back to the beggining
patrickledford420 2 years ago
Things are either necessary or contingent. If they do not contain the reason for their own existence, they are contingent. Contingent things depend on their existence from other things. The universe does not contain the reason for its existence - there is no firm reason why it should exist. It is contingent and so must depend on something else for its existence. The argument is there must be a necessary being for existence to be founded, that is God.
cbproducktions 2 years ago 2
Basically, the fact that the universe is contingent points to it not being self-caused.
cbproducktions 2 years ago
When it comes to the beginning of the universe using our normal logic doesn't make sense since we evolved that logic during a time long after the big bang, we do not have the faculty's to think about the big bang with just normal logic. We need to resort to mathematics to understand the big bang. This kid never proves an infinite regress is not possibles and that the universe could have been it's own first cause.
cc3814 2 years ago
The universe is composed of finite properties that God isn't composed of/bound to.
Every effect has a cause. That's the law of causality. The earth being here has a cause, that cause is an effect of another cause, and so forth. It would be illogical for one to conclude that there has been an infinite amount of cause and effect events before right now because we would have never reached this current event. It's simply impossible for there to be an infinite regress of cause and effect events.
cbproducktions 2 years ago 2
Causality and logic refute the eternal universe hypothesis.
cbproducktions 2 years ago
If it does, it also refutes God, as he logically occupies the exact same role as an eternal universe.
Also, we don't actually know that causality is a universal principle. It's something we infer inductively on the macro level. If quantum uncertainty is a fundamental part of nature, then even "something from nothing" may be a possibility through mechanisms like the Hartle-Hawking state. Of course, that also excludes the idea of "nothing" as totally inert as a possibility in nature.
Gnomefro 2 years ago