The KCA!

[POI]

For Debate: Does the Kalam Cosmological Argument provide sound reasoning for the assertion of a 'prime mover'? If so, does it happen to say anything about what this "prime mover" could even be? If the KCA is instead not good reasoning at all, please explain why?

[Aashi]

[Diagoras]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #146]

I just realised I’d not responded, sorry.

Thanks for the critique - I don’t pretend to fully understand some of the subtleties but think I can see your final point (that an uncaused cause isn’t impossible).

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #146]

I just realised I’d not responded, sorry.

Thanks for the critique - I don’t pretend to fully understand some of the subtleties but think I can see your final point (that an uncaused cause isn’t impossible).

Diagoras - As I have already demonstrated - an uncaused cause of material formation is clearly necessary. However, an immaterial cause of material is as logically sound as a square circle or a married bachelor.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to benchwarmer in post #142]

I think you missed my point. No distance can be physically divided by 2 because all physical objects are discrete. To divide a distance by 2 infinite is merely a mental idea. You cannot even physically do it in math because no matter how powerful of a computer you set to this task, it would never reach it. It would always and only tend toward infinite.

I must have (and still are) missing your point.

What is half of 1 meter? i.e. 1 divided by 2?

So if the distance from where you are standing until you can grab the candy bar on the table is 1 meter, how far do you have to travel to get to the candy bar? What if you decide to do something crazy and only move half the distance from your current point to the candy bar at each step and your first step in the process is 1/2 a meter? The next step 1/4 of a meter? etc. Now do you see what's happening?

If I move my hand in half-step increments, I will eventually run out of physical matter to divide. Even if I don't, I'll reach Planck space, where nothing smaller exists to be divided. At that point, my hand simply stops—I don’t continue moving infinitely. The discreteness of physical matter sets a limit.

Mathematically, I could keep dividing numbers forever, but that’s not the same as dividing actual physical objects

The only reason I must stop moving my hand is because of the rule that I can only move by halving the remaining space. If space itself can no longer be halved, then I have no more steps to take, and movement must stop.

However, in reality, at the quantum level, my hand moves in discrete steps rather than infinitely smaller increments. There is no infinite division of space—motion occurs in quantized jumps, not through a continuum of infinitely smaller movements

[benchwarmer]

[Replying to benchwarmer in post #142]

I think you missed my point. No distance can be physically divided by 2 because all physical objects are discrete. To divide a distance by 2 infinite is merely a mental idea. You cannot even physically do it in math because no matter how powerful of a computer you set to this task, it would never reach it. It would always and only tend toward infinite.

I must have (and still are) missing your point.

What is half of 1 meter? i.e. 1 divided by 2?

So if the distance from where you are standing until you can grab the candy bar on the table is 1 meter, how far do you have to travel to get to the candy bar? What if you decide to do something crazy and only move half the distance from your current point to the candy bar at each step and your first step in the process is 1/2 a meter? The next step 1/4 of a meter? etc. Now do you see what's happening?

If I move my hand in half-step increments, I will eventually run out of physical matter to divide. Even if I don't, I'll reach Planck space, where nothing smaller exists to be divided. At that point, my hand simply stops—I don’t continue moving infinitely. The discreteness of physical matter sets a limit.

Are you confusing space with physical matter? I'm talking about traversing a distance in space.

If you are instead implying that space is also discrete, do you have some scientific evidence to back up your claim? If you do, the scientific community will likely be grateful as this is currently an open science question.

Perhaps you can just quickly tell us what distance you have discovered that cannot be divided by 2 and is no longer traversable and how you know this?

[POI]

[Replying to benchwarmer in post #165]

To lighten the mood:



*****************************

The interlocutor, in which you are engaging, believes that if you meditate long enough, you will find what you want to find. He is essentially also a 'minimal facts' Christian. Even if you blow his mind, and demonstrate that the KCA presents no logical basis for a 'prime mover', it will not matter in the least. Okay, now back to your own exchange with "Aquinas", which will go nowhere...

As for me, the KCA, as well as other goofy philosophical arguments, will not move the proverbial needle either, but for differing reasons. Just like "Aquinas", I too did not become a skeptic based upon any 'lack in evidence' to support the later presented KCA, as well as the teleological argument for that matter, or even the moral argument.... These arguments, though fun to explore, hardly move anyone's belief-barometer.

Anywho, I'll get off my soapbox now.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to benchwarmer in post #142]

I think you missed my point. No distance can be physically divided by 2 because all physical objects are discrete. To divide a distance by 2 infinite is merely a mental idea. You cannot even physically do it in math because no matter how powerful of a computer you set to this task, it would never reach it. It would always and only tend toward infinite.

I must have (and still are) missing your point.

What is half of 1 meter? i.e. 1 divided by 2?

So if the distance from where you are standing until you can grab the candy bar on the table is 1 meter, how far do you have to travel to get to the candy bar? What if you decide to do something crazy and only move half the distance from your current point to the candy bar at each step and your first step in the process is 1/2 a meter? The next step 1/4 of a meter? etc. Now do you see what's happening?

If I move my hand in half-step increments, I will eventually run out of physical matter to divide. Even if I don't, I'll reach Planck space, where nothing smaller exists to be divided. At that point, my hand simply stops—I don’t continue moving infinitely. The discreteness of physical matter sets a limit.

Are you confusing space with physical matter? I'm talking about traversing a distance in space.

If you are instead implying that space is also discrete, do you have some scientific evidence to back up your claim? If you do, the scientific community will likely be grateful as this is currently an open science question.

Perhaps you can just quickly tell us what distance you have discovered that cannot be divided by 2 and is no longer traversable and how you know this?

Yes, I do, from physicists.

Here is one idea of how space can be discrete - https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.01639?

And another -- In quantum gravity, classical physics and quantum mechanics are at odds: scientists are still uncertain how to reconcile the quantum "granularity" of space-time at the Planck scale with the theory of special relativity. https://phys.org/news/2016-04-universe- ... crete.html?

[otseng]

Actually, I don't even think your mind is capable of even dreaming such a thing.

Moderator Warning



Please cease from the personal comments.

Please review our Rules.



______________



Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.