DDO Olympics Philosophy and Morals: Round 2

I apologize if my argument is too brief this round. Due to unfortunate time constraints on my part, I have just over an hour to write this....DEFENSE OF CONCLUSION I : The Universe can be a Necessary Being"The OUC, if true, does not prove that the universe exists necessarily. Yes, the universe would be eternal in the future direction, however in the past the universe would still have a cause. Let me explain: The OUC is essentially the same thing as the BBT except after the universe collapses, it uses that collapse in order to cause another bang and reform the universe."This is false. Pro misunderstands the OUC (Oscillating Universe Cosmology).In the OUC, all existing matter/energy is the necessary, eternal being.The Universe and the Singularity are just forms that matter/energy takes, and the Big Bangs and Big Crunches are nothing more than transitional phases between those forms, brought on by the pull of gravity.There is nothing about one universe being caused by the previous universe ad infinitum. If the OUC holds true, the Universe is not a contingent being, as it is merely an elaborate arrangement of eternal and necessary matter/energy, thus refuting one of the LCA's fundamental premises....DEFENSE OF CONCLUSION II : A Contingent Universe does not need a Necessary External CauseAgain, note that "contingency" implies nothing more than that the Universe COULD have failed to exist."The PSR has its foundation of the philosophical principle ex nihilo nihil fit, from nothing comes nothing. Lets assume the falsity of this principle and the PSR. Imagine a world in which happenings do not need reasons. If existence did not require explanation then why do objects not simply pop into existence?"Pro is taking this out of context. The reason we don't see things pop into existence at random is because we exist in space and time, and the PSR/"ex nihilo nihil fit" does hold true AS FAR AS WE KNOW.However, in this context, we are talking about Big Bang singularity, which existed when there was no such thing as space or time. We have no experience at all with existence outside of space-time, and thus cannot assume that our pre-conceptions based on sensory perceptions within space-time hold true outside of space-time, especially since we have suggestive evidence that conditions were far different, leading me into my next point."My opponent has thus far proposed 2 cosmological theories. He uses the OUC as refutation to the LCA, then dismisses the OUC in favor of the BBT, and in his defense of the BBT he links an article that refutes the validity of the BBT."Criticism does not equate to refutation. I was merely trying to show that we know very little about pre-Bog Bang conditions, and that the fundamental assumptions we currently accept as true could very well turn out to be completely false in such a setting."I'll allow my opponent to introduce new arguments in the next round pertaining to quantum physics, granted that he explicitly states what the arguments are."I apologize for not going into specifics about how modern science has shown that our sensory perception-based assumptions about nature are often false. I will give 2 examples. -- the theory of relativity disproved the notion that time flows at a constant rate for everyone [1] -- the wave-particle duality as seen in quantum physics showed that something can be two radically different things at the same time [2]The point is that we cannot trust our sensory perceptions, as those have been shown to be unreliable, especially since we are dealing with something completely alien to human beings (the lack of space and time). ...DEFENSE OF CONCLUSION III : God is not the only possible Necessary External Cause of a Contingent Universe"There are three conditions for a being to be defined as God.... (2) It is personal. Nonphysical beings are either personal or abstract. For example, the laws of mathematics have no intent or thought, they are abstract. A mind would be able to think, ergo it would be personal..."Why does it have to be personal? The Necessary External Cause can be abstract; a non-personal, non-physical process such as simultaneous causation. This ties back into the idea that we have no knowledge of what is possible in absolute nothingness (no space, no time)....SOURCES[1] http://complexrelativity.com...[2] http://physics.about.com...