Resolved: God Exists

I request Pro to waive Round 5 as Pro presented an argument in Round 1. If Pro does waive or forfeit Round 5, I request voters not to penalize Pro for this minor and irrelevant violation. Arguments1. The Big BangEnergy can be produced by random, uncaused quantum fluctuations. These fluctuations are ripples across inherently existent gravity (gravity is always uncaused) that produce energy strong enough to concentrate into a gravitational singularity that begins to radiate energy as Hawking radiation. [1] In further explanation of this, let me illustrate the function of quantum fluctuations. due to the possibility of uncaused quantum fluctuations, there need not be a personal cause for the Big Bang. [2] If there need not be a personal cause to the Big Bang, with a lack of evidence for a personal cause, we can discredit a personal cause entirely. I will show how there can be uncaused quantum mechanical fluctuations. What are quantum fluctuations? In classical physics, energy is conserved, i. e. it can neither be created nor destroyed. [3] Therefore, it would seem that the sudden appearance of energy, as required by the Big Bang model, would violate the conservation of energy. However, physicists think the uncertainty principle offers a way around this problem. [4] There is a formulaic interpretation of the uncertainty principle. Let ΔE represent the uncertainty in the amount of energy andW10;t represent the uncertainty in the time. Then the product ΔEW10;t is approximately equal to ħ, where ħ = h/2π, and h is Planck’s constant. Planck’s constant has the value 6.62606957 x 10-34 Joule-second. Planck’s constant has the appropriate units of energy and time (Joule, second). Planck’s constant is small, so the uncertainties are vanishingly small on a macroscopic scale. [5] On the scale of subatomic particles, the uncertainties can be large compared to the quantities involved, so the consequences of the uncertainty principle can be significant on the microscopic scale. This is the effect of a quantum fluctuation. These fluctuations are caused randomly, released from the quantum vacuum. [6] Explained in a simpler manner, a quantum fluctuation is a change in the amount of energy in a point of space originating in the quantum vacuum. These fluctuations generally affect thermodynamic systems. [7] Since the change originates in the preexistent quantum vacuum, the fluctuations need not be triggered by a personal cause and perfectly explains the Big Bang. Now, let me offer proof of the big bang. In 1964, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered the CMB radiation, an omnidirectional signal in the microwave band. CMB radiation was found to be consistent with an almost perfect black body spectrum in all directions. The surface of last scattering corresponding to emission of the CMB occurs shortly after recombination, the epoch when neutral hydrogen becomes stable. Prior to this, the universe comprised a hot dense photon-baryon plasma sea where photons were quickly scattered from free charged particles. In October 2014, a measurement of the B-mode polarization, signals of primordial gravitational waves, at a frequency of 150 GHz, was published by the POLARBEAR experiment. Models of cosmic inflation predict that such primordial gravitational waves should appear. Primordial gravitational waves are the result of three things: inflationary expansion of space itself, reheating after inflation, and turbulent fluid mixing of matter and radiation. Proof of inflation is proof of the emergence of the universe from a singularity, a point in gravitational spacetime with infinite density and zero volume, created from the energy inherent to gravity. [8][9] 2. The Omnipotence ParadoxIf a being can perform any action, then it should be able to create a task which this being is unable to perform; hence, this being cannot perform all actions (all actions include hypothetical one; "all" even includes nonexistent, or incomprehensible actions, which, by the rules of absolute omnipotence, require the ability to perform the same by the omnipotent being objectively). Yet, on the other hand, if this being cannot create a task that it is unable to perform, then there exists something it cannot do. [10]By this debate's definition of "omnipotence", the omnipotence referenced here is absolute omnipotence, meaning that there are no limits to the Supreme Being's omnipotence by the terms of this debate. Thus, omnipotence cannot exist. To further expand on this paradox: Now, an omnipotent being ("X") can perform ANY action whatsoever, even if that action, hypothetically, does not exist [yet]. Now let us say X creates a yet non-existent action Y that it cannot perform. [X has the ability to create even that action by the definition of omnipotence] As Y is conceivable by X, X cannot perform Y, even if the action Y does not exist. "All" encompasses the action Y. Therefore, as X cannot perform Y (which X creates only later), X is not omnipotent. Once X creates Y, Y becomes an existent action that X cannot do. Thus, omnipotence is impossible. 3. The Omniscience Paradox(1) If God foreknows of some event E, does E happen necessarily, and (2) if some event E is contingent, how can God foreknow E's occurrence? Thus, omniscience implies the lack of contingency, and thus, by the definition of the existence of a Supreme Being, means everything is definite. This definitiveness is proof of the universe being completely entwined by order. But according to the thermodynamic measure of entropy, there is more than one way in which a thermodynamic system (eg: a region of the universe) may be arranged. This arrangement is variable, yet constant in the fact that the varied arrangements may coexist. Thus, there is, by definition, disorder in the universe. If there is disorder, then only one hypothesis of the possibilities of entropy may be predestined, and not more. Thus, foreknowing all the possibilities is impossible. [11][12][13] There is no chance that no event is contingent. Definitiveness completely violates disorder in this universe. If there is definitiveness and God exists, then God is the only free will agent and we are unknowingly being influenced by God. But as there is absolutely no evidence for that, I will discredit this notion. If even one contingency exists, then God cannot be omniscient because no being can have certainty that a contingency can occur. As the existence of disorder is effectively proven by the laws of thermodynamics, lack of contingencies is impossible. In the debate, God is the source of moral authority, but morality cannot exist if God knows the future. Hence, omniscience is impossible.4. Law of Parsimony The law of parsimony, a derivative of Occam's Razor, states that the simplest explanation is a priori most likely. That God does not exist is the simpler explanation, viz. a sentient, intelligent being is not needed to create or "rule" the universe via. the Big Bang and quantum fluctuations, hence this conclusion. [14] Rebuttals1. This argument doesn't argue for God, thus is irrelevant to the resolution.2. In essence, this is a teleological argument. As stated in "the Omniscience Paradox" argument, all thermodynamic systems [eg. the universe] are governed by entropic graduation and disorder; this teleology is mere human assumption and is via. randomness. References[1] Hawking, S. ; Mlodinow, Leonard. The Grand Design. Bantam Books, New York (2010). ISBN-0-553-80537-1. [2] . http://tinyurl.com... [3] Empedocles (490-430 BCE), et al. [4] Heisenberg, W. (1927), "Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik", Zeitschrift für Physik (in German) 43 (3–4): 172–198 [5] . http://tinyurl.com...[6] Hawking, S. “The Beginning of Time”. Stephen Hawking: The Official Website. Cambridge University. (. http://tinyurl.com...)[7] Browne, Malcolm W. (1990-08-21). "New Direction in Physics: Back in Time". The New York Times. [8] . http://tinyurl.com...[9] . http://tinyurl.com...[10] Savage, C. Wade. "The Paradox of the Stone" Philosophical Review, Vol. 76, No. 1 (Jan. , 1967). [11] Tisza, L. (1966). Generalized Thermodynamics, M. I. T. Press, Cambridge MA. [12] Münster, A. (1970), Classical Thermodynamics, translated by E. S. Halberstadt, Wiley–Interscience, London, ISBN 0-471-62430-6. [13] Bailyn, M. (1994). A Survey of Thermodynamics, American Institute of Physics Press, New York, ISBN 0-88318-797-3. [14] . http://tinyurl.com...; Other non-cited references1. Mandelshtam, Leonid; Tamm, Igor (1945), "The uncertainty relation between energy and time in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics", Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR (ser. Fiz. ) 9: 122–128. 2. . http://tinyurl.com...3. . http://tinyurl.com...;4. "Purtill on Fatalism and Truth". Faith and Philosophy: 229–234. 1990.5. Viney, Donald Wayne (Spring 1989). "Does Omniscience Imply Foreknowledge? Craig on Hartshorneby". Process Studies (Center for Process Studies) 18 (1): 30–37.