1. If the universe is past eternal then we should not be existing right now as there remain an infinite number of events before we exist. 2. If the universe is past eternal then according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics we should already have burnt out in the heat death therefore we should not be existing. Conclusion: We have yet to exist AND we have already existed! Welcome to atheism. We hope you enjoy your future stay which has already finished.
1) which is not a problem sibce there has been an inginitly long time for it to play out. 2) that law is only true for our current universe. we dont know wether it holds before thos universe started.
so true. How can in certain side of universe a.k.a. earth, all the law of physics applied while on the other side, dont. If here, things can't create itself, same goes with entire universe. Good job bros. The real reason I clicked your video is because it looks like you smoking something in thumbnail. okay kidding.
@James Alan Listen to what you wrote and reason for a second. " if you take an infinite number of books out of the bookshelf how many books are left", tell me what number represents the infinity?
Most comments by atheists here are unnecessarily delving into what the concept of Infinity means. In a single line, the argument states that since there can't be an infinite regress of events, there has to be an un-caused cause to start it all. If at all, you should contend that this 'un-caused' cause doesn't necessarily have to be God.
I have started to like this show....Great job by the LDM team for putting forward muslim intellectuals who have studied a great deal in their respective fields
Wonderful logic. True logical argument about past event has a beginning but as it is mention in Quran which meaning is Even if we show 1000 signs to dis believer they do not believe. There is a difference of intellectual understanding but your video is helpful for believer to fight against Shitan who ask questions.
Definitely not because everything in the universe was not as it is during the big bang. During big bang it was just particles that were created and the explosion made everything else get created.
If you believe Infinity exist, it exists. If you believe God created the world, then that's your personal truth. Whatever shit you believe is real but only to you
Infinity is an concept. There's no such thing as half of infinity (books). Infinity means nothing more than 'arbitrary' ... you can make any number of concepts, such as numbers.
abdulrahman mohamad infinite may be a concept of reality but we are judging during the count. To remove an even number would suggest duplicating the infinite by means of division. We see this in DNA as well as the split of atom. When we zoom in on fractals they infinitely divide as long as we can zoom in. This makes potential infinite surely true but also makes the actuality infinite potentially true. How can we judge from or positioning? Single celled organisms divided much how your speaking of and we have yet to see and end to its variation. Math itself is flawed. We see this Pi or when we try to find two perfectly identical items to do math with in nature. 2 apples isnt 2 unless 1 is equal to the other. And we know nature never makes the same thing twice. So doing math in reality is more of a concept realistically. We get close enough so it works but using a flawed system to find flaw with another is senseless
@@TheOnlyKeyz are you saying that we cant really prove anything in the existence to be true including mathematics. And that no matter what we will always need some level of faith to accept any kind of truth.
Infinity divided by two is infinity... Correct. It might be counter-intuitive but that does not mean it is false. Infinity DOES exist. The decimal representation of pi never ends.
You started talking about even number of books , which you have taken as infinite, but this is an incoherent argument as How did you know that the books were of even number after knowing that they are of infinite number ?? Are these statement logically consistent???
This speaker say he is studying astrophysics but it doesnt appear he understands relativity. the main objection to this argument is that in relativity there is no unique "now" that the universe has to get. if the past is infinite , that does not imply there is some beginning that is infinitely far away and the universe has to go from there to here. There is no such beginning implied in these models . There is virtually no one in cosmology who think infinity should be just be ruled out a priori due to logical inconsistency and plenty of cosmologists think the universe is infinite in time and space.
@@AtheismLeadsToIrrationality that is based on singularity theorems proven by Pernsoe and Hawking . All theorems though are based upon assumptions . There are two assumptions of the singularity theorems that scientists focus on as being false. One we know form experimental data is false , that is gravity is always attractive and the other we have good logical reasons to think is false, that is quantum mechanics is not relevant for high energy densities. There are other assumptions too. Bottom line the view that time began 13.8 bio years ago is out of date and so the people in this video are just wrong. You dont have to believe me, hear it from Penrose and Hawking themselves : th-cam.com/video/U7kvjTRW-tw/w-d-xo.html
@@PhilHalper1 1) This video's argument isn't based upon the big bang , Big bang is just for support 2) As far As i know there is not any experiment or Observations which proves Gravity to be repulsive , it's just a theory which is based upon assumptions like Anti Mass exists. 3) It's irrelevant if Unique "now" exists or not for the universe because In Any "Now" it's must have been attained through finite previous Past events as explained in this video. 4) Your Given video is not informative as it could be in my opinion because it's made up of short clips without any context taken and In your given video there's cherry picking like I can provide you the Quotes of Hawking in Which he Admitted that even according to Science Time began. 5) Do you think we can say "14 billion years ago" is real thing ?
@@AtheismLeadsToIrrationality 1) you brought up the the "fact" that the universe is 13.8 billion years old . 2) There is a lot of evidence that gravity can be repulsive. Primarily it comes from observations that the universe is accelerating. read here: www.scientificamerican.com/article/expanding-universe-slows-then-speeds/ . Inflation also is repulsive gravity and according to NASA they have observed evidence for inflation. Theres some controversy about that but alternatives have the same conclusion. of no singularity. 3)it is not irrelevant that there is a unique "now" because if there is no such concept then the objection that the universe couldn't get to "now" would fall over as such a concept has no meaning. Really you should read the professional phislophical literature on this, all of the proponents who write about this accept this . 4) the video is no quoting anyone out of context , read their material properly and you will see that. Hakwing thinks time began because of the Hawking Hartle model but there is no consensus that this model is right . What Hawking agrees with is that singularity theorems are invalid, they have to be or the Hawking Hartle model wouldn't work. 5) 14 billion years ago is how we measure the time since the universe was a in a hot dense state. Others observers will measure something else. There is no objective universal now for the universe.
1. If the universe is past eternal then we should not be existing right now as there remain an infinite number of events before we exist.
2. If the universe is past eternal then according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics we should already have burnt out in the heat death therefore we should not be existing.
Conclusion: We have yet to exist AND we have already existed!
Welcome to atheism. We hope you enjoy your future stay which has already finished.
This comment needs to go up
Elaborate
"We have yet to exist AND we already existed"
Congrats, you got how time works
1) which is not a problem sibce there has been an inginitly long time for it to play out.
2) that law is only true for our current universe. we dont know wether it holds before thos universe started.
so true. How can in certain side of universe a.k.a. earth, all the law of physics applied while on the other side, dont. If here, things can't create itself, same goes with entire universe. Good job bros. The real reason I clicked your video is because it looks like you smoking something in thumbnail. okay kidding.
@James Alan Listen to what you wrote and reason for a second. " if you take an infinite number of books out of the bookshelf how many books are left", tell me what number represents the infinity?
Most comments by atheists here are unnecessarily delving into what the concept of Infinity means. In a single line, the argument states that since there can't be an infinite regress of events, there has to be an un-caused cause to start it all. If at all, you should contend that this 'un-caused' cause doesn't necessarily have to be God.
Which god your Religion god😂😂
there are not any problems with infinite regress.
Religion is a man made creation.
And you have no proof for your claim
Except Islam
@@enacausmembraneBrilliantly done 👍🏻.
I have started to like this show....Great job by the LDM team for putting forward muslim intellectuals who have studied a great deal in their respective fields
Wonderful logic. True logical argument about past event has a beginning but as it is mention in Quran which meaning is Even if we show 1000 signs to dis believer they do not believe. There is a difference of intellectual understanding but your video is helpful for believer to fight against Shitan who ask questions.
This makes perfect sense.
Yes, The Universe always existed. A beginning of change, not a beginning of substance.
There is no sound argument for God
There was no beginning. It always was here.
Definitely not because everything in the universe was not as it is during the big bang. During big bang it was just particles that were created and the explosion made everything else get created.
Awesome, you guys really putting out good content.
+Abdul Rahman Jazakh Allah Khairan brother, I'm old school hahha!
If you believe Infinity exist, it exists. If you believe God created the world, then that's your personal truth. Whatever shit you believe is real but only to you
Please don’t use derogatory terms
😂 no. That Solipsism and Solipsism isnt the way..
@@yourebeautiful9169why not?
5:57 - Oops, these guys just proved that infinity DOES exist. Keeping add one...forever!
Numbers do not represent actual infinity
They said potential infinity
Infinity is an concept. There's no such thing as half of infinity (books). Infinity means nothing more than 'arbitrary' ... you can make any number of concepts, such as numbers.
You just reworded what he said. Infinity is a concept and does not exist in the real world.
abdulrahman mohamad infinite may be a concept of reality but we are judging during the count. To remove an even number would suggest duplicating the infinite by means of division. We see this in DNA as well as the split of atom. When we zoom in on fractals they infinitely divide as long as we can zoom in. This makes potential infinite surely true but also makes the actuality infinite potentially true. How can we judge from or positioning? Single celled organisms divided much how your speaking of and we have yet to see and end to its variation. Math itself is flawed. We see this Pi or when we try to find two perfectly identical items to do math with in nature. 2 apples isnt 2 unless 1 is equal to the other. And we know nature never makes the same thing twice. So doing math in reality is more of a concept realistically. We get close enough so it works but using a flawed system to find flaw with another is senseless
@@TheOnlyKeyz are you saying that we cant really prove anything in the existence to be true including mathematics. And that no matter what we will always need some level of faith to accept any kind of truth.
All of these arguments could be used to prove that an eternal god cannot exist...
So how many infinities do u take away before u get zero?
Infinity divided by two is infinity... Correct. It might be counter-intuitive but that does not mean it is false.
Infinity DOES exist. The decimal representation of pi never ends.
budoka 68 wow! The number of pi is finite between 3 .1 and 3.2 the infinite decimal numbers is just a concept not an actual infinity
@@soultandem3298the number itself isn't equal infinity but it's made on an infinite amount of numbers
7:37 . xeno's paradox invalidates this reasoning.
You started talking about even number of books , which you have taken as infinite, but this is an incoherent argument as How did you know that the books were of even number after knowing that they are of infinite number ?? Are these statement logically consistent???
It's a thought experiment bro.. Look it up.
This speaker say he is studying astrophysics but it doesnt appear he understands relativity. the main objection to this argument is that in relativity there is no unique "now" that the universe has to get. if the past is infinite , that does not imply there is some beginning that is infinitely far away and the universe has to go from there to here. There is no such beginning implied in these models . There is virtually no one in cosmology who think infinity should be just be ruled out a priori due to logical inconsistency and plenty of cosmologists think the universe is infinite in time and space.
so what does it mean when we say big bang happend and time began 13.8 billion years ago ?
@@AtheismLeadsToIrrationality that is based on singularity theorems proven by Pernsoe and Hawking . All theorems though are based upon assumptions . There are two assumptions of the singularity theorems that scientists focus on as being false. One we know form experimental data is false , that is gravity is always attractive and the other we have good logical reasons to think is false, that is quantum mechanics is not relevant for high energy densities. There are other assumptions too. Bottom line the view that time began 13.8 bio years ago is out of date and so the people in this video are just wrong. You dont have to believe me, hear it from Penrose and Hawking themselves : th-cam.com/video/U7kvjTRW-tw/w-d-xo.html
@@AtheismLeadsToIrrationality 13.8 billon years is the time we measure from the era of last scattering. A photon would metre it differently though.
@@PhilHalper1 1) This video's argument isn't based upon the big bang , Big bang is just for support
2) As far As i know there is not any experiment or Observations which proves Gravity to be repulsive , it's just a theory which is based upon assumptions like Anti Mass exists.
3) It's irrelevant if Unique "now" exists or not for the universe because In Any "Now" it's must have been attained through finite previous Past events as explained in this video.
4) Your Given video is not informative as it could be in my opinion because it's made up of short clips without any context taken and In your given video there's cherry picking like I can provide you the Quotes of Hawking in Which he Admitted that even according to Science Time began.
5) Do you think we can say "14 billion years ago" is real thing ?
@@AtheismLeadsToIrrationality 1) you brought up the the "fact" that the universe is 13.8 billion years old . 2) There is a lot of evidence that gravity can be repulsive. Primarily it comes from observations that the universe is accelerating. read here: www.scientificamerican.com/article/expanding-universe-slows-then-speeds/ . Inflation also is repulsive gravity and according to NASA they have observed evidence for inflation. Theres some controversy about that but alternatives have the same conclusion. of no singularity. 3)it is not irrelevant that there is a unique "now" because if there is no such concept then the objection that the universe couldn't get to "now" would fall over as such a concept has no meaning. Really you should read the professional phislophical literature on this, all of the proponents who write about this accept this . 4) the video is no quoting anyone out of context , read their material properly and you will see that. Hakwing thinks time began because of the Hawking Hartle model but there is no consensus that this model is right . What Hawking agrees with is that singularity theorems are invalid, they have to be or the Hawking Hartle model wouldn't work. 5) 14 billion years ago is how we measure the time since the universe was a in a hot dense state. Others observers will measure something else. There is no objective universal now for the universe.
Of course God believers must say God created the universe . But they cannot prove it. Their only justification for saying this is they Believe so
There are signs. But if you don't see. That's not my problem.
Cuz it's doesn't matter what you believe Truth doesn't change.
and non religious people believe that from an explosion can come perfection and order, how brilliant people
@@cjdkskxnxksk the difference is, non-god-believers can admit they may be wrong and are ok with that but not god fanatics