Why Infinity and the Laws of Thermodynamics supports, if not proves the existence of God.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: AfterInfinity

Because special pleading:

Special pleading is a formal logical fallacy where a participant demands special considerations for a particular premise of theirs. Usually this is because in order for their argument to work, they need to provide some way to get out of a logical inconsistency — in a lot of cases, this will be the fact that their argument contradicts past arguments or actions. Therefore, they introduce a "special case" or an exception to their rules.
While this is acceptable in genuine special cases, it becomes a formal fallacy when a person doesn't adequately justify why the case is special.

Ah. Thank you for that technical term. I will have to remember it.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: edmc^2

You know if you are going to try to make a scientific argument using the Laws of Thermodynamics, it helps to actually LIST them so everyone has a good idea of where you are arguing from and won't be able to misinterpret the laws because they don't fully know what they are. Here, I'll help you out:

Laws of Thermodynamics

Zeroth law of thermodynamics - If two systems are in thermal equilibrium with a third system, they must be in thermal equilibrium with each other. This law helps define the notion of temperature.

First law of thermodynamics - Heat is a form of energy. Because energy is conserved, the internal energy of a system changes as heat flows in or out of it. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the first kind are impossible.

Second law of thermodynamics - The entropy of any isolated system almost never decreases. Such systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium — the state of maximum entropy of the system. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the second kind are impossible.

Third law of thermodynamics - The entropy of a system approaches a constant value as the temperature approaches absolute zero.[2] With the exception of glasses the entropy of a system at absolute zero is typically close to zero, and is equal to the log of the multiplicity of the quantum ground state.

Thanks Krazysh0t for the info but I thought the vid I provided in the op would suffice. I guess not for those who are not able to view it. In any case thanks.

So since you're well verse on this subject, do think the universe will someday goes into equilibrium?

If so, will this also collapse space into nothingness thereby rendering it to an infinite void?

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: edmc^2

Ok, perhaps the problem is with our definition of the things we are talking about then.

Space isn't infinite though as far as we know. The expansion of Space doesn't mean it is expanding within some other Space. Space is the Space and is the limit. If it is in fact expanding it therefor cannot be infinite either, since it is still expanding.

Infinite as far as I know only exists conceptually. There is no physical infinite that we know of or that is measurable. It exists in Fractals and Math and within conceptual thinking but not in Reality. Even our own Universe as far as we know isn't infinite. In fact the part of your theory about Space being Finite is the part that seems correct to me actually.

You could perhaps say that Expanding Space is infinite because it is still expanding however that wouldn't explain the Planck length limit since that too would mean Finite Space Limitation.

I agree, how things are defined affects how we see and understand things.

But just to make this clear let me use this conceptual illustration of the Universe.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0bc26b654706.jpg[/atsimg]

The physical observable universe is finite because it had a beginning 14 billion years ago and is still expanding.

But the Space to which it's expanding to is infinite because it has no known boundary.

Hence infinite space time continuum.

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

Another space?

scaleofuniverse.com...

a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

Another space?

What is behind God? Another god? You still haven't explained that one to us.

a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

That is like saying "god must have created the universe".

But if God created the universe then who or what created God. God is your wall, now what then is behind that wall?


Anyway you never addressed my post. You claim something was created from nothing at the Big Bang, but before the Big Bang there was a singularity. A singularity is not nothing.

Everything you have based that upon then falls flat.

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

Another space?

No one knows. At this point, we're still working on getting a man to Mars. The rest can wait its turn.

Of course space is infinite, otherwise how can the universe expand at such alarming an rate?

But just to pique my curiosity - what's behind, around, in front, envelopes the observable universe as depicted in the illustration below?

Is it nothing or infinite space?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0bc26b654706.jpg[/atsimg]

What does your logic say?

a reply to: edmc^2

I stopped reading after you said -

if you decide to present your side of the argument or to counter mine, please do so - as I will - in a logical and commonsensical manner.

and followed with -

Now, here's why (I know and believe) Infinity and the Laws of Thermodynamics supports, if not proves the existence of God.

You can't start off your argument stating that you already KNOW the answer to something unknowable. You lose all credibility. You could say this is why I think this to be true, and maybe people would take you more seriously.

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

Another space?

What is behind God? Another god? You still haven't explained that one to us.

Only one answer - if there's ONLY ONE space and that it's infinite, then it should follow that there's no other space but this infinite space. Which then follows that if space is infinite then it has no beginning or end. Hence it always existed. Therefore it's uncreated.

The same concept applies to God.

Let me know if this not logical enough to grasp.

originally posted by: Euphem
a reply to: edmc^2

I stopped reading after you said -

if you decide to present your side of the argument or to counter mine, please do so - as I will - in a logical and commonsensical manner.

and followed with -

Now, here's why (I know and believe) Infinity and the Laws of Thermodynamics supports, if not proves the existence of God.

You can't start off your argument stating that you already KNOW the answer to something unknowable. You lose all credibility. You could say this is why I think this to be true, and maybe people would take you more seriously.

If one have doubts of what he or she believes then what's the point of believing. Besides I'm operating in the realm of logic and common sense backed up by everyday experienced.

Hopefully though you can prove me wrong - logically of course.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

That is like saying "god must have created the universe".

But if God created the universe then who or what created God. God is your wall, now what then is behind that wall?


Anyway you never addressed my post. You claim something was created from nothing at the Big Bang, but before the Big Bang there was a singularity. A singularity is not nothing.

Everything you have based that upon then falls flat.

Same answer I gave to AfterInfinity:

Only one answer - if there's ONLY ONE space and that it's infinite, then it should follow that there's no other space but this infinite space. Which then follows that if space is infinite then it has no beginning or end. Hence it always existed. Therefore it's uncreated.

The same concept applies to God.

Let me know if this not logical enough to grasp.

As for the Singularity, you're correct it's NOT nothing but the transformation of Dynamic Energy.

E = m c 2 to be precise.

Q is - what or who put E = m c 2 into motion?

a reply to: edmc^2

Well let me ask you this. If you have already come to the conclusion that something has always existed (god) then I ask what is to say that the material/singularity/energy that is our universe hasn't always existed?

Why do you need to add a deity to the mix? We have evidence of the matter that makes up the known universe however we do not have evidence of a deity that exists outside of it.

I believe I once read a hypothesis that the known universe is in a cycle of collapsing in on itself creating the singularity then exploding again as a Big Bang.

There is no need for a creator in that scenario. If you must have a creator you must solve for that creators origin because as you said something doesn't come from nothing.

If you can say god always was then likewise one can say the material for the known universe always was.

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

Another space?

What is behind God? Another god? You still haven't explained that one to us.

Only one answer - if there's ONLY ONE space and that it's infinite, then it should follow that there's no other space but this infinite space. Which then follows that if space is infinite then it has no beginning or end. Hence it always existed. Therefore it's uncreated.

The same concept applies to God.

Let me know if this not logical enough to grasp.

If the same concept can apply to God, then surely it can apply to something other than God...such as the universe. If God can exist without being created, so can the universe.

Boom. Logic, baby.

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

Another space?

No one knows. At this point, we're still working on getting a man to Mars. The rest can wait its turn.

Of course space is infinite, otherwise how can the universe expand at such alarming an rate?

But just to pique my curiosity - what's behind, around, in front, envelopes the observable universe as depicted in the illustration below?

Is it nothing or infinite space?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0bc26b654706.jpg[/atsimg]

What does your logic say?

My logic says that neither of us is equipped to accurately answer that question.

a reply to: edmc^2

Only one answer - if there's ONLY ONE space and that it's infinite, then it should follow that there's no other space but this infinite space. Which then follows that if space is infinite then it has no beginning or end. Hence it always existed. Therefore it's uncreated.

Perhaps you can sort out a question I have concerning your statements. Looking at what we "know" pretty much everything has limits. From a H20 molecule to the solar system. So I'm struggling with finding logic in stating that "space" doesn't have a limit as well. Logic doesn't dictate to take something that you haven't the slightest idea about and making a assertion about it's size. Since we are unable to see outside the edges of the universe nor do we have any way of having the slightest idea if there is only one universe or "space" for that matter, I'm not seeing the supporting logic after reading through your thread. Maybe I have missed something to give more support to your idea, but from what I gather from the thread is your speculating on things that at this point cannot be known.

I'm not saying that your wrong, only stating that it's something that is outside our abilities to know. Common sense in this case would be to understand the shortcomings and accept the possibility that your wrong. But, since we can't know these things at this point maybe your spot on.

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: edmc^2

But if we say that it is finite then it follows that it must have a boundary, which means that someday the expanding universe will hit this "wall".

But this is not logical because if we say that it has a "wall", what then is behind the wall or boundary?

Another space?

No one knows. At this point, we're still working on getting a man to Mars. The rest can wait its turn.

Of course space is infinite, otherwise how can the universe expand at such alarming an rate?

But just to pique my curiosity - what's behind, around, in front, envelopes the observable universe as depicted in the illustration below?

Is it nothing or infinite space?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0bc26b654706.jpg[/atsimg]

What does your logic say?

My logic says that neither of us is equipped to accurately answer that question.

Why do you limit yourself to what others say?

Now, this is the beauty of those who believe in God, a Creator. That is, we've already advanced to next level of existence in that we're able to see with our minds eye what's out there. We're not limited to the physical but able to fathom the spiritual, the invisible part of our universe.

But then again, I understand your position because you see things only on the physical level. Thus, you're unsure of what you believe. Hoping that someday someone will tell you what to believe and not to believe.

So for my part I'm quite sure of what I believe and can back up what I say based on logic and common sense.

a reply to: edmc^2

Now, this is the beauty of those who believe in God, a Creator. That is, we've already advanced to next level of existence in that we're able to see with our minds eye what's out there. We're not limited to the physical but able to fathom the spiritual, the invisible part of our universe.

That is called faith.

BTW I once thought as you, believed as you, but as it turned out the medication I was taking due to a miss diagnosis was literally driving me crazy. Point is I know where you are coming from.

So for my part I'm quite sure of what I believe and can back up what I say based on logic and common sense.

Unfortunately what you have just described is not logic nor common sense it is faith.

Faith is belief that is not based on proof.

originally posted by: drivers1492
a reply to: edmc^2

Only one answer - if there's ONLY ONE space and that it's infinite, then it should follow that there's no other space but this infinite space. Which then follows that if space is infinite then it has no beginning or end. Hence it always existed. Therefore it's uncreated.

Perhaps you can sort out a question I have concerning your statements. Looking at what we "know" pretty much everything has limits. From a H20 molecule to the solar system. So I'm struggling with finding logic in stating that "space" doesn't have a limit as well. Logic doesn't dictate to take something that you haven't the slightest idea about and making a assertion about it's size. Since we are unable to see outside the edges of the universe nor do we have any way of having the slightest idea if there is only one universe or "space" for that matter, I'm not seeing the supporting logic after reading through your thread. Maybe I have missed something to give more support to your idea, but from what I gather from the thread is your speculating on things that at this point cannot be known.

I'm not saying that your wrong, only stating that it's something that is outside our abilities to know. Common sense in this case would be to understand the shortcomings and accept the possibility that your wrong. But, since we can't know these things at this point maybe your spot on.

Correct, everything has a limit up to a certain point and depending of what the "thing" is. But the point I'm making is that if the concept of infinity tells us that when something is infinite - it means there's no value that we can attached to it. Hence when we say infinite space, therefore we can't attached any value or dimension to it. It's just its nature, otherwise we call it finite space. But that terminology is inaccurate because there's no such thing as finite space. Finite area or volume might be the correct definition. Hence space is always infinite. And like I said, based on logic, common sense and everyday experienced, if something has space then that space will go on and on ad infinitum. The only thing that makes it appear to be finite is a boundary. But the boundary itself is part of space because both sides of the boundary is still space. Hence the space that we occupy is part of the infinite space from within and without.

There's no other way to conceptualized infinity but that it has no beginning and no end. Hence uncreated. Otherwise we're living in a universe and space that has limits - which is illogical.

Now if space is just is - uncreated, then what's illogical about saying that God is uncreated?

None that I can think of.

originally posted by: edmc^2

Thanks Krazysh0t for the info but I thought the vid I provided in the op would suffice. I guess not for those who are not able to view it. In any case thanks.

It's always better to type these things out. Not being able to view videos is one reason, but also having it written down means that anyone can sit and look at it carefully and read it at their own pace instead of trying to interpret the meaning from the speed of someone else's voice or video playback.

So since you're well verse on this subject, do think the universe will someday goes into equilibrium?

Probably.

If so, will this also collapse space into nothingness thereby rendering it to an infinite void?

That could be a result. It's tough to say, we don't have all the variables to consider on what will happen to the universe when everything hits equilibrium status. Though I doubt it would be infinite. Space may continue to expand, but if the universe isn't infinite now, it won't be infinite then. Nothingness will just become larger and larger.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: edmc^2

Now, this is the beauty of those who believe in God, a Creator. That is, we've already advanced to next level of existence in that we're able to see with our minds eye what's out there. We're not limited to the physical but able to fathom the spiritual, the invisible part of our universe.

That is called faith.

BTW I once thought as you, believed as you, but as it turned out the medication I was taking due to a miss diagnosis was literally driving me crazy. Point is I know where you are coming from.

So for my part I'm quite sure of what I believe and can back up what I say based on logic and common sense.

Unfortunately what you have just described is not logic nor common sense it is faith.

Faith is belief that is not based on proof.

I beg to differ.

Faith, I mean real faith not blind faith - is based on realities that are not beheld - by the physical eye.

It's one of the foundations of what we are. Just like you have faith that sun will come up again tomorrow although you don't see it while asleep. You know and have faith that it will be there because you have a solid foundation to based it on - you're everyday experience that it will be there each day.

Hence my faith tells me that even though there are things that I can't see nor touch I know they are there because the reality gives proof of their existence.

Case in point - the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Although I can't literally see or touch it, I know it's there because I feel and experienced its effect.

It's the effect of the things that I can't see that convinces me they are real hence I faith in them.

As such, since nothing produces nothing then the opposite is true. I have faith that when I put something I expect for something to come out. Thus, I'm convinced and have faith that the universe didn't just come on its own volition but that something or someone made it happen. No such thing as a purposeful directed accidental event.

It's simple as that.

So have a little faith my friend - it'll do you good.

a reply to: edmc^2

Ok I get what your saying. So my question would be, why assume there is no boundary that the universe is expanding towards. Even including the existence of god that doesn't seem to bring me to a conclusion that, like everything else we know of, it may have a boundary. It's one of those things outside the scope of making a logical conclusion about. The same can be said of an infinite space in concerns to an existence of god. Simply because something just "is" and always has been doesn't give much support to another thing(which is completely different since it's an aware being) existing. The only way that is supported is if there is a correlation between the two. Using biblical reference there was nothing before god, and since space is a thing it wasn't there making it not infinite.