Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonlfunk  There is a distinction between man-made and natural substances. But I can change the example - you walk into your room and there is a chunk of a natural substance, say a rock. You assume that someone put it there and that it didn't just pop into existence right before you walked into the room. Things don't just come into existence without a reason, or a cause. This is a fundamental principle of science and nature. You are walking a shaky ground to deny it. |
Matter is neither created nor destroyed. The argument of creationism denies that. There does not have to be a first cause for the "existence" of matter in and of itself, and the big bang is the best guess we have now of the arrangement of the universe.
Quote:
|
Secondly, I am not begging the question. I agree with you that it is logically possible that the universe is everlasting, but it is not actually possible given our set of physical laws. You're thought experiment completely contradicts the 2nd law. Even if what you say happens, it cannot happen for all time. Every bang would have to be a little smaller then the last... eventually it would have to stop. It cannot go forever.
|
"The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium."
There is such a thing as cyclical equilibrium- consider the common physics classroom example of a mass on a frictionless spring- it will bounce forever and be considered "in equilibrium".
And again, creation contradicts a different law in a way that cannot be gotten around.