81
Just Chat! / Re: Can science prove God exists?
« on: 06/04/2020 12:58:41 »How about the ex nihilo of the laws of physics?The laws of physics are man-made summaries of observation, nothing more. We observe a universe of finite age, therefore what exists now, once did not exist. Some folks wonder how it happened, some folks assert who did it. Being of an enquiring mind, I prefer the "how".
Nice side-step. But it is not an answer. If you want to be part of a debate about God you cannot limit yourself and your answers.
The laws of physics could be seen as recorded observations of the universe and how it behaves. But what I am referring to are the actual laws that are there whether observed or not. We are not dealing with a Schoedingers cat situation. Gravity exists whether observed or not. And so do all the other laws such as those of thermodynamics and E=mc^2.
Did these laws exist before t=0? Why are all the constants what they are and not just a little different? Why was there a slight excess of matter as opposed to anti-matter? You realize that if we had an equal amount of matter and anti-matter the universe would not have evolved the way it did.
What I am saying is surely the "laws" have to be there before the Big Bang. And if so, where did they come from and why are do they have the forms and constants that they do? Science takes some of these constants which seem arbitrary and changes them ever so slightly. The result is the universe does not evolve anything like it did, but also there seems to be no emergent properties that would allow galaxies and life to evolve.
Try one of Einsteins thought experiments. Imagine there is nothing at all. Then a moment later there is time and space and energy and matter. Why? What in the nothing changed? And what law of physics existed to allow or permit a sudden change from nothing to something. If that laws of physics existed before t=0 then you have to adjust you t=0 to the point where the laws came into existence. If the laws came into existence at the same time as the nothing to something, the question is still - what changed?
Even Lawrence Krauss in his book "A Universe from Nothing" concedes there had to be something.
You prefer the how. Okay how did we go from nothing to something. All you seem to be doing is saying that you do not care about anything before t=0.