Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 26, 2024, 1:27 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Something that can strengthen the cosmological argument?
#1
Something that can strengthen the cosmological argument?
This would not be a definitive proof, but what if someone reasoned, given the nature of all moments of time is to preceded by a moment of time, an exception to the rule, which is necessary if time is finite, would imply something outside the natural state of the universe is more likely to have caused it, then for it to stop at time zero with no reason at all?

Also, "why now now" is usually answered because of time before it, but at time zero, there is a "now now" which is just mysteriously there with no precedence. Now something outside time seems more likely, then simply, "well there is no north to north pole" reasoning.

Thoughts?
Reply
#2
RE: Something that can strengthen the cosmological argument?
(April 8, 2013 at 5:59 am)MysticKnight Wrote: This would not be a definitive proof, but what if someone reasoned, given the nature of all moments of time is to preceded by a moment of time, an exception to the rule, which is necessary if time is finite, would imply something outside the natural state of the universe is more likely to have caused it, then for it to stop at time zero with no reason at all?

Also, "why now now" is usually answered because of time before it, but at time zero, there is a "now now" which is just mysteriously there with no precedence. Now something outside time seems more likely, then simply, "well there is no north to north pole" reasoning.

Thoughts?

This is an interesting issue. If all reference frames have to yield the same results, same principles of physics, then the reference frame of photons must also work. From the time frame of the photon there is no time between emission from one atom and absorption by another. In that sense atoms from the first light of cosmic background radiation connects the atoms in our sensors that measure it today.

Also, ignoring time, where did the big bang occur. It occured in all existing space today. The points are only separated because of time.
Atoms are connected by photons in the first case but have to be separated in time in the second. And both reference frames have to result in the same physics.

I am still working on it, including on how to phrase the issue before trying to answer it. So far I think time is a local dimension and the four continuous dimensions of the universe are x,y,z and entropy.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Is CS a science or engineering, or maybe something else? FlatAssembler 90 4913 November 6, 2023 at 7:48 am
Last Post: FlatAssembler
  The Cosmological Proof LinuxGal 53 3474 September 24, 2023 at 12:24 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  Can somebody give me a good argument in favor of objective morality? Aegon 19 4445 March 14, 2018 at 6:42 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Something from Nothing Banned 66 11367 March 7, 2018 at 5:52 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Creatio Ex Nihilo - Forming Something out of Nothing? GrandizerII 70 11987 February 24, 2015 at 6:21 pm
Last Post: IATIA
  Why Something Rather Than Nothing? datc 249 30066 November 7, 2014 at 4:33 pm
Last Post: LostDays
  Something more. Mystic 20 2885 October 20, 2014 at 6:58 pm
Last Post: Mudhammam
  Can the laws of physics bring something into existence? Freedom of thought 23 5704 June 23, 2014 at 12:43 pm
Last Post: Surgenator
  The following is not a question: Can something come from nothing? Alex K 204 30616 April 16, 2014 at 6:02 pm
Last Post: ManMachine
  The cosmological argument really needs to die already. Freedom of thought 16 4320 December 13, 2013 at 10:07 am
Last Post: Esquilax



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)