luvluv

1) For the theist, wouldn't God and the physical universe be part of the same system?

2) If God is not part of the system of the physical universe, then how can you explain your insistence on other threads that God's knowledge can be said to cause human free action?

mirage

We have extremely good grounds to declare it. Conservation of energy applied within the context of the universe. It is another concept only meaningful in a time dimension.

35Kas

Well no we dont. Not in the sense i meant.

We cant say that conservation of energy doesnt work outside the universe because we dont even know if there is an "outside the universe". Saying that because it works in the universe, doesnt mean it works outside of it is a logical step, but then again, it would be based on the unproven (and i add, meaningles) idea of there existing something outside the universe.

Why is it only meaningful in a time dimension? We can simply say d=vt.

I dont see where did the idea of there not existing time before the Big Bang came. No one knows that just to start. As i mentioned earlier, our constructs are not able to explain what happened in the beggining, and we cannot know what happened before either. The concept that there wasnt time present comes from the assumption that the the universe itself, hence space-time, didnt exist. That is an utter unproven assumption.

Think of black holes. We incorrectly assume that because GR describes mass collapsing to a singularity, that is what happens. We dont know that. And just as we dont know what really happens inside a black hole, we dont know what happened at the beggining, if we can define that, of the big bang. Our theories point to existance starting, as space-time, in a singularity, but the truth, as far as i am educated, is that we dont really know what happened there. Black holes can be something completely different from what we think they are. Some of the newsest theories describe dark energy stars and the less popular gravastar theory. Even QM says something different from GR. Whats to say it isnt the same issue with the Big Bang?

I re-assert that yes we could declare a fallacy of composition, because it is, but what i meant on that we have no grounds to declare that is due the fact that the idea is based on unproven extrapolations such as "outside the universe" and "before time".

mirage

Yes, certainly. So how do you define a relation between one part of the system and the whole system in terms of a dimension of that system?
I very much maintain that he has to be included in the system of analysis, whether you consider God to be in a special non material part or what. You can't look at causal relations with god if you don't include him in the analysis model! I agree.

luvluv

Okay, so, um... why can't he cause the physical universe to exist again?

mirage

Well exactly. So how are you comparing "no universe" with "look! there's a universe" and declaring a conservation violation?
Well what the does the "t" stand for?

I agree entirely. But when we say "universe" we mean the whole shebang, so there really was nothing before time. If you posit an eternal time / spacetime container for our BB, thats OK, but that denies causality too.
I agree. Which is why my arguments aren't based much on cosmology but on philosophy.
Both are meaningless as you say. But we can still see that just as time before time makes no sense, the notion of time itself being caused makes no sense. It just isn't what cause means, and we don't need Big Bang cosmology to see that.

Even if there is some other relation between "the universe" and something else, that relation just drags in the something else into the total catalogue of everything. At some point, you have to stop inventing external containers and contexts for your system and realise that the question "why is there something rather than nothing" has no meaningful answer. The question is a mistake.

mirage

He can. If you are happy to view god as one component and the observed universe as another, both existing within a larger system.

God hasn't made the whole system. He hasn't caused himself, and he hasn't made the rules governing his interaction with our bit.

God in this view is a super advanced alien who's made his own little Big Bang. A pretty self consistent theology (as they go) in my view.

Tsumetai

Yes, actually. There's no global conservation of energy in GR.

Tsumetai

Not all spatially infinite Universes are flat. Hyperbolic will do nicely. And not all flat Universes are spatially infinite, for that matter.

luvluv

Sure, that's orthodox theism.

Uh... what rules? You mean logic? He's omnipotent, so logic's the only "rule" that restricts him.

I still don't get why is it exactly that you think that creating spacetime is impossible?