RE: The First Cause? Prime Mover Argument
May 8, 2015 at 10:58 am
(This post was last modified: May 8, 2015 at 11:01 am by JuliaL.)
(May 8, 2015 at 8:54 am)Alex K Wrote: - Individual events at the quantum level don't seem to have a cause. What we know about fundamental physics would suggest that universes like ours can simply occur in the same random fashion in which nuclear decays occur. Your notion of a mover seems to hinge on a classical concept of causality which is not valid any more.Mybold.
I heartily approve of your use of the word 'seem' in the first sentence but I have to differ with 'suggest' in the second.
If A is random and B is random then they are not linked in any way. Any association between them is contrived and unsupported. For QM randomness to 'suggest' universe creation 'seems' to claim knowledge of causality of the universe outside the universe whose unknowability has already been cited elsewhere in this thread.
And as (seems to me) you are the most professional physicist on the forum, I find it troubling that you would use a quote and graphic of Dr. Strangelove for your avatar. Not only Christians are afraid of people more educated than they are.
So how, exactly, does God know that She's NOT a brain in a vat?