We are within spacetime. It appears from the Big Bang that spacetime has a start. The cause of the start of spacetime must be external to time. You may not agree, but it is quite a reasonable argument.
That leads to the conclusion that we will never, ever be able to tell the cause of spacetime, because the cause is external to space time.
So I maintain my position - strong atheism is an illogical and unscientific belief.
The initial conditions of the Big Bang theory, have matter and spacetime (already) in existence.
BGV theorem says that spacetime has a boundary in the past. I am not sure if its true or not - but neither should you be. It is a reasonable argument and it implies that the universe was created by something external to space time.
So I maintain, professing certainty on the existence or non-existence of god or god-like creatures, is not a logical position to hold - how can we ever make logical inferences or collect empirical data for something outside spacetime - so it is also not a scientific position to hold.
What evidence do you have that humans can never know about anything outside of spacetime, or that anything exists outside of spacetime? These are merely assertions.
That isnât quite true. It demonstrates that using the current laws as postulates (laws which are known to be wrong!); that there is a boundary you canât calculate beyond.
I am not asserting anything about the existence of something outside spacetime, I am merely pointing out that no-one can ever disprove the existence of such conclusively. Hence a possibility remains that the universe is a creation. So it is not logical to profess 100% certainty that no god or god-like creatures exist.
Well its expanding, so it must have had an initial expansion point in spacial and temporal terms. So that suggests either creation ex Nihilo or something external to spacetime. The second seems like a reasonable argument - something external to spacetime caused/created spacetime. So I do not think strong atheism is a tenable position - it is not humanly possible to profess 100% certainty in such matters.
That is an extremely reckless assumption.
Iâm quite certain you donât know what the fuck you are talking about.
The origin of the universe HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH STRONG ATHEIST. Atheists are people who do not believe in God or Gods. A strong atheist is someone who asserts YOUR VERSION of god DOES NOT EXIST.
You got a version we have not heard about� Lets hear it. I have seen no evidence for any God stand against critical inquiry thus far. Yours could be the first.
No one gives a shit about the origin of the universe. Your version of god is not a possibility until you demonstrate it exists.
I see you are continuing to post here after being informed this forum is for humans only. Are you human? Or are you violating the rules here?
That is a false dilemma, you are presenting only two options.
Strong atheism is the assertion there is no god. You are implying, by default, that strong atheism implies a position on cosmology. Please do not conflate the two very different positions.
This assertion is rarely made in my experience and when it is, like I do to any theist, I ask for proof.
HOWEVER I will not have confidence in assertions without demonstrable evidence. There is no evidence of a âgodââŠso no belief is warranted.
There is something from something and, as Cog asked, demonstrate ânothingâ⊠but again, something is a far cry from a god or supernatural agent of any sort.
AND you said to Nyar âŠ
So what the fuck are you claiming you are- it better not be god, cause everyone here knows Iâve made that claim, of being god, several times (but, alas, none takes me serious, or questions me 
)
I think you replied on the wrong post. Frederick12 said that.
Yup Fredrick said to NyarâŠ
The arrows on the quotes show the specific post/posters.
Wrong. First of all, the papers I cited above postulate an eternally existing spacetime, within which the requisite processes take place. The assertion that the instantiation of the universe must take place âoutsideâ spacetime is a blind mythology fanboy assertion, and nothing more.
Again wrong. Try reading the actual scientific papers in question instead of wasting time with mythology and apologetics.
Bad news for you - physicists have already done this.
For example, physicists can calculate the temperature of the early universe, by taking note of the fact that the cosmic microwave background (henceforh, CMB for short) has been cosmologically red-shifted since the initial radiation was emitted. That radiation was originally emitted as infrared radiation (see below for the calculation), and there is a known precise relationship between the thermal temperature of matter, and the radiation it emits. Apparently you slept through your physics classes.
First, the relationship between wavelength and cosmological redshift is given by the following formula:
z = (λobsv/λemit) - 1
where λobsv is the observed wavelength at the present time, and λemit is the wavelength at which the radiation was emitted (by a now distant appropriate entity). It transpires that for the cosmic microwave background, the cosmological redshift z is approximately 1,091. Rearranging the above formula gives us:
λemit = λobsv/(z + 1)
Feeding in the peak wavelength of 1.063 mm (1.063 à 10-3 m) for λobsv, and 1091 for z, we have:
λemit = 9.7 à 10-7
This corresponds to an emitted wavelength of 970 nanometres, which is squarely in the infra-red. Courtesy of Wienâs Displacement law, this corresponds to a temperature of:
T = (2.897 à 10-3)/λemit = 2976 K.
The CMB was emitted approximately 379,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled to a point where stable neutral atoms of hydrogen could form, and thus the universe became transparent to long range propagation of photons.
Indeed, you will find, in the requisite literature, frequent references to the temperature corresponding to the energies utilised in particle accelerator experiments. One electron volt (the standard unit used to measure particle accelerator energies) corresponds to a thermal temperature of approximately 11,604 K. The Large Hadron Collider, when it operates at its maximum possible energy of 14 TeV, will produce an effective temperature within the collision confinement region of 1.624 Ă 1017 K. This would, according to Wienâs displacement law, correspond to a photon wavelength of 1.783 Ă 10-20 m, which is well into the highest energy gamma ray part of the EM spectrum, and would be the sort of temperature expected to be present around 10-6 seconds after the Big Bang (temperature at T=10-43 seconds was 1032 K).
You can find out more about the relevant physics here, and a little of the known history of the universe here.
Enjoy being humiliated in this manner, do you?
Again, this is a very bold assertion, on what evidence are you basing this certainty?
Not necessarily, how strong is your disbelief in unicorns or mermaids? Youâre assuming strong means absolute. In this thread only you seem to be dealing in absolutes.
No it isnât, at all. How do you know the idea of a created universe is limited to one concept as a creator?
