The Universe: Eternal or Finite?

Do you really believe the universe is eternal like the Rational Response Squad does? Is that really a logical possibility and is it really what science tells us? This is my answer to such a profound question.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Christian
• Apologetics
• Science
• Logic
• Philosophy
• First
• Cause
• Universe
• Eternal
• Finite
• Big
• Bang
• Thermodynamics

[fatfist]

Let's stay FOCUSED here Bass.

You are making some wild assertions. It is not my job to prove a negative. You need to PROVE your positive claims. The BURDEN OF PROOF is on you. As a scientist, you SHOULD know this!

I have asked you MANY times already: PLEASE SHOW 1 OF SOMETHING THAT IS CREATED.

Enough of the religious poetry please. Just explain your concept of CREATION in the context of REALITY, and not using heart-felt emotion - please!

[BassP86]

I have already showed how the eternality of the universe is logically impossible. You are trying to make it look like I didn't. No offense, but any more diversive and insulting comments like that, and I will delete your comments. Continue up with it afterwords, and I will block you from my channel.

I know you can do better than this. So please do not change subjects and insult me because I am religious.

[zigor4]

Im getting tired now but i like your arguments ...i just want to say that i dont have a closed mindover either finite or infinite(how could i there is no proof either way) options but at the moment i am at an infinite position .I think that the universe has a start and finish as we know it but that 'before' the start it was very different meaning that it is always changing.

[floydstinkyboy]

bass check out neil turok's article on the cyclical nature of the universe. edge d0t 0rg. see also, Hawkings and Hartle on the No Boundary Universe.

they say you are wrong!

[x1101011x]

"You are trying to make it look like I didn't."

Hate to break it to you, but you didn't. Even William Lane Craig's video, which you recommended, admits that there's no logical problems with an infinite amount of time in the past.

[fatfist]

Hey Bass, please realize I'm not trying to upset you. If you can't explain how your "creation" concept scientifically applies to the reality of the universe, then it's ok. Please don't worry about it. This is only a scientific discussion. The last thing I wanna do is make people upset.

You know, people don't have an answer for everything. This is why we have faith. All humans have faith. Peace!

[fatfist]

Bass, the issue here is not to prove the universe is not eternal. You are trying to prove a negative, and you have failed.

This issue is for you to PROVE the universe is CREATED - a positive! But first you must define and explain the word CREATE.

Especially how nothing (no space, no void, no god) can surreptitiously be converted to specific 3D objects having LxWxH.

Let's not lose track about what your video is about, bass. Stay focused on your claim, please.

[fatfist]

How did the U begin to exist (according to your definition above)? Until you explain this step, your argument is logically and scientifically invalid.

The conclusion is a Non-Sequitor since P1 and P2 have failed.

I wouldn't use Craig's arguments. I have proven them all invalid before.

[fatfist]

1) Anything that begins to exist has a cause.

2) The universe began to exist.

3) Therefore the universe has a cause.

Craig's argument above does not prove anything.

P1 does not define the word exist scientifically. Until you DEFINE the word 'exist' unambiguously at this point, you have nothing. Thus this argument is logically invalid and scientifically invalid.

P2 is a bald assertion and commits fallacy Begging the Question.

[fatfist]

Oh Bass, how can u say I am insulting you. I didn't call u any bad names. If someone did, that would be childish. We are having an intellectual exchange here.

You are making a claim about creation, and I am asking u to scientifically explain it. Science uses theories to explain logically and rationally how some event happens. That is all you are expected to do about your concept of CREATION.

This is science after all.

[BassP86]

"You are introducing abstract terms into the discussion in order to change the topic." - Matter is anything that takes up physical space. Mass is the density of that matter, similar to the weight of something. That's science not abstraction.