Comments on: Dr. Frank Turek Has Evidence http://www.anatheist.net/2009/04/dr-frank-turek-has-evidence/ Atheism & Religious Skepticism Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:59:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: James Tracy http://www.anatheist.net/2009/04/dr-frank-turek-has-evidence/comment-page-1/#comment-4419 James Tracy Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:06:30 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=2547#comment-4419 That is true. The second law of thermodynamics would be at least a local property of our universe and require some explanation as to how it got 'wound up' so to speak. But Turek seems to bee 100% confident that there is no problem here and it has been completely settled. That is true. The second law of thermodynamics would be at least a local property of our universe and require some explanation as to how it got 'wound up' so to speak. But Turek seems to bee 100% confident that there is no problem here and it has been completely settled.

]]> By: Chucky http://www.anatheist.net/2009/04/dr-frank-turek-has-evidence/comment-page-1/#comment-4414 Chucky Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:42:05 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=2547#comment-4414 You mean general relativity, I think. Special relativity is combined with quantum mechanics in quantum field theory... The problem is deeper than just requiring a rewrite of quantum mechanics and general relativity. You need an infinite universe, for which you also seemingly need to reject thermodynamics (specifically the second law). You mean general relativity, I think. Special relativity is combined with quantum mechanics in quantum field theory…

The problem is deeper than just requiring a rewrite of quantum mechanics and general relativity. You need an infinite universe, for which you also seemingly need to reject thermodynamics (specifically the second law).

]]> By: James Tracy http://www.anatheist.net/2009/04/dr-frank-turek-has-evidence/comment-page-1/#comment-4398 James Tracy Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:58:04 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=2547#comment-4398 Not all physicists agree that space and time themselves came into existence with the Big Bang. This cannot be resolved without some theory that can unify quantum mechanics with classical relativity. Not all physicists agree that space and time themselves came into existence with the Big Bang. This cannot be resolved without some theory that can unify quantum mechanics with classical relativity.

]]> By: Chucky http://www.anatheist.net/2009/04/dr-frank-turek-has-evidence/comment-page-1/#comment-4392 Chucky Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:42:08 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=2547#comment-4392 I guess in response someone would reply: - Quantum mechanics doesn't mean that logic is invalid. If you have to reject logic in order to maintain atheism, then are you being reasonable? - The idea with the big bang is that time and space themselves come into existence (which is implied in the word "initial" in your quote) with the big bang, so there simply is no before. Hawking says "the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago." I guess in response someone would reply:

- Quantum mechanics doesn't mean that logic is invalid. If you have to reject logic in order to maintain atheism, then are you being reasonable?

- The idea with the big bang is that time and space themselves come into existence (which is implied in the word "initial" in your quote) with the big bang, so there simply is no before. Hawking says "the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago."

]]>