Resolved: God Exists

I shall begin with my contentions and then move onto the refutations. CONTENTIONS C1) Quantum Superposition All particles are at a state known as a quantum superposition, i. e. when a particle moves towards a point, it moves in all routes toward the point simultaneously, but it will seem as if it is moving only in one route. This is illustrated in the analogy of Erwin Schrödinger’s cat, which presents a scenario in which a cat is both alive and dead at the same time, but it can be observed only as either alive or dead. [1] For God to create the universe, he acts as an external cause; an omniscient external cause is naturally all-observing, via. the definition of omniscient, “all-seeing and all-knowing. ” An external cause is, therefore, naturally all-observing, and this is impossible via. this contention: P1: An external cause will be omniscient and, therefore, all-observing. P2: Observation collapses quantum superpositions. P3: An all-observing being would automatically collapse all quantum superpositions. P4: We observe that not all quantum superpositions are collapsed. C: Therefore, an external cause or omniscient being (God) cannot exist. C2) Causality is Not Required “There is sufficient evidence at present to justify the belief that the universe began to exist without being caused to do so. This evidence includes the Hawking-Penrose singularity theorems that are based on Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, and the recently introduced Quantum Cosmological Models of the early universe. The singularity theorems lead to an explication of the beginning of the universe that involves the notion of a Big Bang singularity, and the Quantum Cosmological Models represent the beginning largely in terms of the notion of a vacuum fluctuation. Theories that represent the universe as infinitely old or as caused to begin are shown to be at odds with or at least unsupported by these and other current cosmological notions. ” [2] As mentioned above, Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose calculated the Hawking-Penrose singularity theorems, that demonstrate that the universe began to exist without a cause, violating Empedocles’ laws of classical physics via. the idea of a gravitational singularity. [3] An example of this is a quantum mechanical fluctuation. During these vacuum fluctuations, a particle and an antiparticle exist for a very short time, and annihilate with a great release of energy. This does not violate any physical laws, as explained by Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. As these reactions take place within the vacuum state, we can thus derive that the quantum vacuum is the source of all potentiality. [4] Therefore, the universe can function without the existence of God. C3) Logical Incoherencies The existence of God is a subject of logical incoherence, viz. God’s properties of omnipotence, omniscience, etc. are not metaphysically possible. I shall illustrate how. CIIIA. Omnipotence As illustrated in the rather well-known Paradox of the Stone, omnipotence is impossible. The Paradox of the Stone takes this structure: P1: An omnipotent being can perform any action, natural or supernatural. P2: If P1, then an omnipotent being should be able to create an action which it cannot perform. C1: If P2 is true, then as the omnipotent being cannot perform that action, it is not omnipotent. C2: If P2 is false, then the omnipotent being cannot perform the action of creating that action, ergo, it is not omnipotent. CONCLUSION: Omnipotence is impossible. [5] CIIIB. Omniscience If God is omniscient, then God knows everything with absolute certainty. If everything is known with absolute certainty, then nothing is contingent. Lack of contingencies violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, that states that the entropy and randomness in the movements of particles in a thermodynamic system is high and is constantly increasing. [6] As omniscience violates the Second Law, it is impossible. C4) Occam’s Razor The Law of Parsimony, a form of Occam’s Razor, posits that out of two explanations, the explanation with least assumptions is a priori more likely. The explanation of a naturalistic origin only assumes a physical universe with its laws, while the theistic explanation assumes a universe, its laws, and the existence of God. REFUTATION R1) Teleology The argument from teleology (design) presented by my opponent is refuted by the Second Law once more. As stated before, “design” cannot exist simply because of the rise of entropy in the universe. Ergo, the universe is one of dysteleology, not teleology. R2) Mathematical Probability Penrose’s calculations merely illustrated that the universe arose out of chance is unlikely; design is not the only other viable option. Penrose, an atheist, also showed that the universe existed out of necessity due to the bending of spacetime creating a vector form of negative energy: gravity. This is supported by the zero-energy universe hypothesis, that states that the negative energy from gravity exactly cancels out the scalar energy of the universe, making the sum of all energy in the universe of a net value of zero. [7] Sources [1] Gribbin, John (2011). In Search of Schrodinger's Cat: Quantum Physics And Reality. Random House Publishing Group. p. 234. ISBN 0307790444. 2] Smith, Quentin (1988). “The Uncaused Beginning of the Universe. ” Philosophy of Science. 55:1. pp. 39-57. [. http://infidels.org...] [3] Hawking, S. and Penrose, R. (1965). “Singularities in Homogeneous World Models. ” Physical Letters. 17:246-247. [4] . http://abyss.uoregon.edu... [5] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [6] . http://www.talkorigins.org... [7] . http://en.wikipedia.org...