(April 25, 2016 at 10:51 pm)Jehanne Wrote:(April 25, 2016 at 9:35 am)SteveII Wrote: Your summation make no sense. Our universe is either infinite or finite.
So, when you didn't get the right answer from Carroll, you moved to Hawkings (with whom Carroll does not agree).
Hawkings uses "imaginary time" in his equations to avoid a singularity. "Only if we could picture the universe in terms of imaginary time would there be no singularities . . . . When one goes back to the real time in which we live, however, there will still appear to be singularities." Brief History of Time, pp. 138-39.
I could not find an explanation of this strategy, so it appears that the only reason to use this "trick" is to stop the time component of space-time before you get back to the singularity and then declares because there was no time, you can't discuss what was before his "time boundary". That still does nothing to answer the question of where did this prior state come from? And what happened that time started up?
If you are claiming that this theory (that many cosmologists disagree with) somehow removes the need for an explanation because causality no longer applies before the imaginary time-induced boundary, it is up to you to defend why despite 100% of our observations indicate its truth and science would not exist without it that you are justified to dismiss it when it is inconvenient.
The "explanation" that "God did it, and oh, by the way, god is a 'necessary being' who needs no explanation for his/her/its existence" is, for me at least, no explanation. I'll go with Hawking over Craig, a communications major from Wheaton College who went on to study biblical history in graduate school. Professor Hawking is getting old, but he is sticking by his ideas:
You just won't answer any questions will you?
I kind of assumed you didn't need an explanation. You really don't want to think past "Dr. Craig is a liar" and his credentials.
