Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] Kalam cosmological argument

beganone has a bit of trouble with this word What does it mean?To me it implies the existence of time (by itself) which has all kinds of problems Alex. F. BurrIn a message dated 1/13/2021 9:21:53 AM Mountain Standard Time, writes: 
Hi again,

to clarify my position: I'm not personally interested in proofs for or
againts the existence of God. However, my friend asked a physicist's
opinion on the Kalam cosmological argument, and I promised to do so. I
suppose that physics has something to say about the following premises:

1) Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2) The universe began to exist.
3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Causality appears not to be fully preserved at a quantum level. For
instance, one can talk only about statistical causality, say, in a
double slit experiment with electrons. The interference pattern is
formed only after enough electrons have passed through. The position a
given electron will end up in a screen cannot be predicted, only the
pattern formed by many electrons. Hence the term statistical causality.
Or have I missed something?



Forum for Physics Educators