The universe is a closed system. Therefore, Newton's second law, the law of thermodynamics, and the law of conservation of energy all apply to it.
Does God need a creator? No. Because he exists in timelessness, where none of the universe's laws apply.
Newton's second law
Objects at rest remain at rest unless acted upon by a net force. The atoms of our universe needed a force to start expanding.
Thermodynamics
The 1st law of thermodynamics states that energy is constant. The second law of thermodynamics states that entropy only increases in a closed system. Eventually, the universe will flatten out at an omega state (the big crunch, mentioned in the Qur'an). What has an end must have a beginning.
The law of conservation of energy
The law of causality, that is, cause and effect, applies to our universe. Therefore, the energy of our universe must have a source.
How does that "answer atheism"? At best that is a statement that things used to be tighter and more organized than they now are. There are hundreds of reasons that could be. You would have to show why it requires a god (or better yet your particular God, Allah), and you have made no attempt to do that here. So no, this isn't answering atheism in one paragraph. This isn't even one paragraph actually lol
"The belief that there was nothing
and nothing happened to nothing
and then nothing magically
exploded for no reason, creating
everything and then a bunch of
everything magically rearranged
itself for no reason what so ever
into self replicating bits which
then turned into dinosaurs.
"The belief that there was nothing
and nothing happened to nothing
and then nothing magically
exploded for no reason, creating
everything and then a bunch of
everything magically rearranged
itself for no reason what so ever
into self replicating bits which
then turned into dinosaurs.
If Allah helps you, none can overcome you; and if He forsakes you, who is there after Him that can help you? And in Allah (Alone) let believers put their trust.
Surah Ale Imran : 160
It was narrated that Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) said:
The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) climbed up Uhud, accompanied by Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan, and the mountain shook with them. He struck it with his foot and said: “Stand firm, O Uhud, for there is no one on you but a Prophet or a Siddeeq or two martyrs.”
Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3483)
Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Taala) does not inspire seeking forgiveness in a slave whom he wishes to punish.
At this time it’s simply not possible to state definitively that our universe is a closed system. There are many theories which involve the existence of other universes, with radically different physics than our own.
if you're the one who finds the premise faulty it is incumbent upon you to clarify in which way. Don't you think?- else why did you bother comment on the alleged faultiness if you can't articulate what it is?
Please, just google 'multiverse' and come back when you've finished.
It isn't my job to do your homework for you. Don't be dropping terms, making claims and/or accusations and then asking us to guess to your intended meaning by referencing us to some vague google search!
Remember that atheist guy on this forum who said the universe came out of zero?
How zero exploded and everything came into being?
My stomach was aching from laughing when I heard about it.
Remember that atheist guy on this forum who said the universe came out of zero?
How zero exploded and everything came into being?
My stomach was aching from laughing when I heard about it.
Better yet he was trying to divide the Zero and yet on his calculator the results were defined.. Sadly not the case for the rest of us and hey I am open to change & valuable new info. as much as the next guy so long as it is done outside the corridors of Shepard Pratt.
He claimed to be "answering atheism in one paragraph". He gave more than one paragraph and has not mentioned anything requiring Allah, or any other sort of Gods. Nothing is answered. This OP refutes itself.
"The belief that there was nothing
and nothing happened to nothing
and then nothing magically
exploded for no reason, creating
everything and then a bunch of
everything magically rearranged
itself for no reason what so ever
into self replicating bits which
then turned into dinosaurs.
Makes perfect sense."
Who are you quoting here?
Why do religious folks always try to tell atheists that they believe the universe came from nothing? It could be cyclical. It could be split off from a multiverse. We don't have to pretend to know. We can admit we don't know. There is no need to invent magical God creatures and pretend they created the universe just so we can claim to have the answer.
Last edited by Pygoscelis; 01-17-2013 at 06:40 AM.
"The belief that there was nothing
and nothing happened to nothing
and then nothing magically
exploded for no reason, creating
everything and then a bunch of
everything magically rearranged
itself for no reason what so ever
into self replicating bits which
then turned into dinosaurs.
Makes perfect sense."
Actually, that's metaphysical naturalism under the current understanding of physics. As for atheism, that doesn't even require a paragraph, just one sentence. Here it is:
The author of this thread MohammedR, has rather hastily and in an exceedingly incorrect way come to conclusions due to poor understanding of some rather basic scientific principles.
format_quote Originally Posted by MohammadR
The universe is a closed system.
The very first line is a rudimentary failure. When anyone refers to the universe, they are usually referring to the observable universe. What is beyond this observable universe? It is essentially a lost cause, as due to the nature of photos and how physics works. Beyond a particular distance, we cease to be able to observe radiation. So to assume that the universe to be a closed system is incorrect.
The big bang is the best possible scientific explanation as of today as to how the universe as we know came to be. All we know is that the universe expanded to what it is today from an infinitely dense and infinitely hot singularity. What happened before that, no one really knows. And in a philosophical sense, that question is meaningless as the time space continuum did not exist.
Trying to use Newtonian physics to explain the workings of the universe is perhaps your biggest mistake of all. Newtonian physics requires you to consider the constraints of absolute time and fixed 3 dimensional space (height, length and width) as being linear. That is why Eisenstein's contributions in relativity has been so monumental. Newtonian physics work very well on a day to day level to explain phenomenon related to earth. But as you hit the realm of space and time, the unravel rather easily.
This post exemplifies the dangerous nature of religious dogma. If you already have your conclusions drawn out from the start, objective pursuit of knowledge is impossible. You will scour through, filter and twist your extrapolations to fit your conclusions, rather than form hypotheses from data. Science is a bottom up approach, not a top-down one.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
ba51th liked this post
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks