Proof for not God?

An atheist sent this to me. Anyone know how to respond?

Infinite memory is not achievable. Memory cannot be infinite because if it was, it would not be able to tick itself down to the present moment. In other words, if memory were infinite, the present moment would not exist for who ever has this infinite memory. God cannot be eternal…

The reason to why anything exists is because of the laws of physics. Everything which exists is existing because of the laws of physics. Since nothing can exist without the laws of physics, nothing could have created the laws of physics. Some people may try to refute against this by stating that this is like saying a circle could not exist without a pencil so the pencil always existed. However, this is an invalid analogy because many things can exist without a pencil. And the things that can exist without the pencil, can create the pencil. However, nothing can exist without the laws of physics. If there was a point in time in which the laws of physics did not exist, nothing at all would have ever existed. Hence, the laws of physics always existed. God did not create the laws of physics…

Many people will claim that god is ‘all powerful’. However, in order to be all powerful, there must be physics in place which would give no limit to a person’s power. However, the laws of physics clearly place limits on what can be achieved. As I revealed on one of my previous arguments, god could not exist without the laws of physics, hence god could not create the laws of physics. It is impossible to be all powerful because that would be a violation of the laws of physics. God cannot be omnipotent…

Some people will claim that god is outside the laws of physics and the laws of physics do not apply to him. As described earlier, if something existed outside the laws of physics, it would not exist at all. Hence, anything which exists requires the laws of physics. A deity would have to exist with reality in order to exist…

Many people will say that god is a spiritual entity and the laws of physics do not apply to him. They will also claim that god is not a physical entity. Anything which exists has to be a physical entity. If something is not physical, then it does not exist. Anything which exists has to be physical. It also must have the ability to interact with matter around it. Dark matter is a physical force. Dark matter is a physical force which gives objects gravity. Dark energy is the opposing force to dark matter. Dark energy is the physical force which spreads objects apart. If being a spiritual entity by definition means not being physical, and god is described to be a spiritual entity, then god does not exist. God would have to be a physical entity in order to exist…

Scientists have recently confirmed the big bang to be a true event by detecting gravity ripples and variations in CMBR radiation. This is not the only exciting news however. Cosmologists now believe that they have found out what caused the big bang. In quantum physics, there is a principle caused Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. This principle states that for a pair of conjugate variables such as position/momentum and energy/time, it is impossible to predict precise values for each variable. Hence there can never be nothing. This is because if there was nothing, one would be able to predict the precise values for each variable. Heisenberg’s principle forbids that. Hence, in a vacuum, energy is required. This energy would form quantum fluctuations. Quantum fluctuations is the creation of anti-particle and particle pairs. At a point in time those particles collided which lead to the creation of the big bang. One must not resort to asking what came before quantum fluctuations because causality breaks down at the subatomic level. Quantum fluctuations does not violate the law conservation of matter because energy is conserved in the vacuum. God did not create the universe…

Recently, a new scientific discovery has revealed another way for a universe to be created. Here is the explanation: An Isolated body in space must have positive gravitational energy. This is because if an isolated body in space had negative gravitational energy, the objects motion could equalize the negative energy with positive energy. If the energies were equalized, then multiple copies of the isolated body would randomly pop into existence. Since an isolated body has more positive than negative energy, it would take work to assemble an isolated body. This is why space is locally stable. However, space is globally unstable. This means that all the positive gravitational energy in the cosmos can be balanced out by negative gravitational energy. Since the positive and negative energies in the cosmos are equalized, it is perfectly possible for multiple universes to spontaneously appear out of nothing! This to a great extent proves the multiverse! This does NOT violate the law of conservation of matter because the energies are equalized. It is believed that some universes came from quantum fluctuations, and others were created by gravity. Same conclusion as the previous argument

Can anyone give a good response to this?

Ooh, I hope we got some good Fr. Sptizers in here to refute this :]

Weren’t the laws of physics broken or not yet created at the moment of the Big Bang? I’m just asking because I have heard that at that moment the laws of physics did not apply. I am curious what a physicist has to say about this.

If only Jimmy Akin were here.

:stuck_out_tongue:

It’s amateur hour in philosophy.

if memory were infinite, the present moment would not exist for who ever has this infinite memory.

But if God knew ALL of time at once (which is what the Church teaches) this argument collapses.

Everything which exists is existing because of the laws of physics.

Nonsense. The laws of physics describe how things behave. They do not create anything. If space were empty the laws of physics would still apply.

Do thoughts exist? Do dreams exist? Does love (or hate) exist? Does the number five exist? If A=B, does A exist?

However, the laws of physics clearly place limits on what can be achieved.

There’s no law in physics that precludes an infinite source of energy. In fact, some laws stipulate it (for example, as an object approaches the speed of light, it’s mass approaches infinity, requiring an infinite source of energy to move it. There’s nothing in Relativity that precludes such a source from existing).

As described earlier, if something existed outside the laws of physics, it would not exist at all. Hence, anything which exists requires the laws of physics.

Do thoughts exist? Do dreams exist? Does love (or hate) exist? Does the number five exist? Does time exist?

Dark matter is a physical force which gives objects gravity.

Noooo, that would be the Higgs Boson. And matter cannot be a force (force is energy - the product of mass and acceleration).

Quantum fluctuations does not violate the law conservation of matter because energy is conserved in the vacuum.

The net mass/energy of the universe is constant, even at a quantum level. This simply supposes that all of the mass in the universe once existed as energy (no matter) and somehow, in a billionth of a second, 14.3 billion years ago, that balance shifted dramatically. Nobody can cite a reputable physicist who holds that opinion. And, besides, it has nothing to do with God. Even were it true, it would only describe HOW God created the universe.

Recently, a new scientific discovery has revealed another way for a universe to be created… blah…blah…blah…multiverse!

It’s not a discovery, it’s a theory, and one that is held by a small minority of physicists (as a way to explain quantum superposition). And, besides, a multiverse does not preclude God as its origin.

You are correct - this is the opinion of every reputable physicist. Nobody (and I do mean nobody) believes that the laws of physics known to us were operative in the “inflationary epoch” (which lasted only some 10[sup]−36[/sup] seconds after the Bang).

I think this article will be helpful. Read it and I think you can refute it yourself:

edwardfeser.blogspot.ca/2014/07/carroll-on-laws-and-causation.html

I keep seeing reference to modern science on Metaphysical questions. That is simply a category and a methodological error; questions of the Existence of God and the Divine Nature are questions of Metaphysics and Natural Theology; not the Natural Sciences. their object is different and not suited to providing answers to Metaphysical question that they themselves must presuppose to get off the ground.

This is the way I see that atheist’s arguments:

Rule #1: The atheist is always right.

Rule #2: If you ever think the atheist is wrong, see rule #1.

Well I have a physics degree and I struggled with understanding the equations let alone using it as a logical existence for God. I have thankfully never found science compelling either way, faith comes not just from the mind, I’m sorry that won’t help any atheist unless they open their heart and put the logic away.

As a suggestion to an atheist physicist perhaps try putting the physics book in the drawer and take out the bible turn to Genesis if you dare read it once , then if you still don’ t agree read it again even better read the other stories too, beware it is not like a science book you can’t just memorise sets of equations and solve everything. Why read it many times? Because the truth is there but it’s not based on scientific logic it is not based on IQ whether you get it, for me every time I re read scripture it can give fresh meaning.

I could be wrong if you find the logic for God existing let me know I know on faith that it would prove his existence …, if God had willed it to be logically deduced I’m sure we would all have heard about it by now,

Dude; don’t put away that Logic. Just “Ite Ad Thomam!”; faith and reason do not contradict. It is an article of faith that the Existence of God and his attributes can be known from created being through the natural light of reason.

Thanks skeptic
I believe the laws of physics describe/reflect the wonderful works of God, I prob have not made this clear, I am just trying to emphasise the need for more than plain logic.

Perhaps I am wrong in which case I am all ears

I just concerned about atheists not turning to scripture etc.

Thanks

amazon.com/New-Proofs-Existence-God-Contributions/dp/0802863833/

This is probably very relevant for you. Also Physics isn’t “plain logic” Formal Logic is plain logic, but that is simply a tool. Metaphysical Demonstration and not Inductive inference is the method proper to demonstrating the Existence of God; which has been done many times. Just because Atheists ignore the arguments doesn’t mean they do not exist, and are not sound.

If you can deal with advanced Metaphysics (in the broad sense- including both Ontology and Epistemology) Fr Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange “God his Existence and His Nature” deals with the question at length.

I will probably have some trouble understanding Ontology etc :thumbsup:

But having read the blurb about the book it looks v. appealing, so I’ll be definitely egtting hold of a copy

thank you

First assumption: That God is limited by the laws of physics. However, if God is an infinite being, how could the limited laws of physics, including the law against infinite memory, apply? Our God is not a creature of this universe.

Second assumption: That only that which is physical exists. Does Math exist? It is not physical, although it has many physical expressions. What of love, or justice, or any of the other non-physical virtues?

Third assumption: that the laws of physics, which are descriptive and always subject to further refinement, that is, to change, are universal. Well, we thought for many decades that Newton’s Laws of mechanics were universal and always applied. We first noted some problems in calculating the orbit of Mercury; now we have instruments precise enough that the GPS system has to be adjusted for relativistic effects. We have similar problems when it comes to calculating, say, radiation, which includes the effects of quantum mechanics. Indeed, we don’t precisely know how to calculate the effects of both relativity and quantum physics–so we know our rules are inadequate for expressing reality. How can we begin to claim that God is bound by them?

This is very difficult to answer because it does not even make sense. The person who wrote this just repeats himself and uses the subject of the argument as proof of the incorrect answer which, is the subject. Sort of like saying the laws of physics are the laws of physics because the the laws of physics are the laws of physics. And, a person cannot be outside of the USA because if a person is outside of the USA the person would be outside the USA.:confused::wink:

I perceive infinite memory as possible given an infinite future. Since God lives forever, his memory never ceases growing.

Thanks for sharing the interesting material!

God is eternal, not “forever”. The term forever implies temporal conditioning, which means a change in moments. This change between “presents” implies a motion from potency to act, which is absurd as God is immutable as Pure Actuality.

I know I may be nitpicking, but the semantics are important for a clarity in idea :stuck_out_tongue:

Thanks for sharing the distinction!

Would the following be a better understanding?
I perceive infinite memory as possible given interactions within an infinite future. Since God interacts with beings that live forever, His memory never ceases growing.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.