God speaks to the theists.

[Plane]

 
I think it is a safe speculation that anything can be created from nothing. Asimov, as a scientist, certainly can speculate, as can we all, but it is a far more likely speculation than, for example, the Holy Trinity, or the Second Coming.

Point being , it is not impossible, as far as our best educated know , to create something from nothing.

The Universe is not decomposing. There are, at any given moment, an infinite or practically infinite number of stars dying  and of Novas coming into existence.

Yes it is, entropy is universal and inescapable .



If there is no free lunch then we are watching the universe gradually cool, if it is large and hot then this just means  it will take a long time to run down.

Unless of course , something can be made of nothing, that is a free lunch.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The Universe will take so very long to run down that to humans it might as well be eternal.

Since we do not understand the role of Dark Matter, I do not think that we much accept that the Universe will run down.

There is matter and there is energy. They both have many forms, and each can transform into the other, but neither, so far as we know, can just vanish.

On Earth, things lose energy because the energy goes elsewhere. But matter and energy do not seem to be capable of just vanishing. Perhaps they become Dark Matter or are absorbed into Black Holes. But they do not just vanish.

[Plane]

Entropy does not destroy energy, it spreads it around .

Everything is a wound spring, to wind it up requires and input of energy , every output of energy relaxes the winding of the spring.

Perpetual motion , even of the entire universe, does not happen.

Unless there is making something from nothing, then to whatever extent this occurs, there is exception to this rule.

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is gravity, and gravity is a constant and eternal force. However weak it might be, it will cause matter to attract more matter and matter will amass into ever larger chunks until it reaches a critical mass.

Matter will always have gravity, and gravity will serve to slowly wind the spring up again.

[Plane]

There is gravity, and gravity is a constant and eternal force. However weak it might be, it will cause matter to attract more matter and matter will amass into ever larger chunks until it reaches a critical mass.

Matter will always have gravity, and gravity will serve to slowly wind the spring up again.

 

You have almost got it , masses that attract each other do represent potential energy , but as they approach each other that energy is converted to kinetic energy and heat.

Then when everything is together, all the rocks are at the bottom of the hill, this energy is used up.

In the most extreme example a black hole has an escape velocity above the speed of light. At that point all the energy of all the universe would not lift a bean out of the singularity.

[Xavier_Onassis]

If there is sufficient stuff in a black hole, then it explodes in a Big Bang and the process happens all over again.

[Plane]

No one knows this.

But if it happens like that , then you are getting something for nothing, a wound spring with no work, a free lunch.

But for the universe to begin in the first place , something of a free lunch must have happened.

[Xavier_Onassis]

You assume that there was a first place. Perhaps the Universe is eternal.

Why is eternity so easy to accept if there is a Deity, and unacceptable if there is none?

[Plane]

Eternity is a physical impossibility, the same reason that perpetual motion machines are a bad investment.

Unless you accept miracles. A beginning is a requirement because an end is inevitable.


The beginning is a singularity too, so we are stuck with believing something we cannot explain in the slightest either way.

[Xavier_Onassis]

So how is an Eternal Deity possible and an Eternal Universe impossible?


The latter is far less complicated than the former. A nearly  infinite quantity of mass, energy, dark matter and such in a truly boundless amount of space. 

And, again, it is always best to assume the simple rather than the more complicated.

[Plane]

  We observe the universe , it is definitely running down , this is observable.

   If the universe is not running down then we don't understand the rules at all.

    But because the universe must end , it is impossible that it stretches an eternity into the past, because in something less than an eternity it will have ended.

  The absolute beginning of the universe is an enigma, we do not know the rules that apply at that point or earlier. We do not even know that the term "earlier" has any meaning from the point of the beginning, because if there were no matter ,no energy, no space, would there be any time?

We do not observe God running down and he admits to no limits to his endurance, so either his nature is different than the nature of the universe , or we haven't heard the truth about him.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Yeah, right. The Universe is running down because the rules of science applies.
God, on the other hand, does not say he runs down, so he must be exempt from the laws of physics.
But of course, God has simply failed to say he can run down.

I am pretty sure we do not know all the rules of physics, especially regarding the entire Universe, since there is a lot we do not know. We don't understand dark matter, we are unclear about black holes, we are unsure of string theory.

But God? Of course, we know it all, it is here in this book. The one that claims that the stars will fall out of the sky. The one that claims that insanity can be removed by casting into swine.

[Plane]

  We only know of God what he has revealed.

    I believe he has revealed only a tiny bit of himself.

     But accepting that the universe had a beginning is accepting a miracle isn't it? We really do not have any science about the moment before the event or the moment of the event, and that it happened violates the rules we do know.

    But we might as well accept that the universe is real, and is as we perceive , you would have to be God to know.