Are Atheists Hypocrites?

The following is taken from a YouTube comment thread:

Atheist

So precious how theists all try to claim an infinite regress is impossible even though it isn’t but here’s this thing about human linguistics that makes even the idea of it absurd.

So obviously the limitations of human language prove an infinite regress is impossible.

Me to Atheist

Here, the question is not whether an infinite regress is possible or impossible. An infinite regress is non-observable and therefore, unscientific.

Below I am going to present an infinite regress of some sort. Please tell me how you will convince others that there is really such an infinite regress in nature.

Let us start from the earth.

Earth exists within the solar system.

The solar system exists within the Milky Way galaxy.

The Milky Way galaxy exists within the local cluster of galaxies. This cluster again exists within some super-cluster of galaxies. This super-cluster of galaxies exists within the universe that contains trillions of other galaxies.

The universe exists within the multiverse that contains trillions of other universes.

Cosmologists usually stop at this level; they do not go beyond the multiverse.

But there is no binding that we would have to stop here at the multiverse level at all.

So we would say that this multiverse exists within some super-multiverse that contains trillions of other multiverses.

Then we would again say that this super-multiverse exists within some super-duper multiverse that contains trillions of other super-multiverses.

Then we would again say that this super-duper multiverse exists within some supra-multiverse that contains trillions of other super-duper multiverses.

Then we would again say that this supra-multiverse exists within some supra-dupra multiverse that contains trillions of other supra-multiverses.

And so on and on ad infinitum.

We know earth exists. Therefore, there will also be an infinite regress of this sort:

Universe – Multiverse – Super-multiverse – Super-duper multiverse – Supra-multiverse – Supra-dupra multiverse – up to infinity.

If you are in favor of the infinite regress here, then you will have to give evidence that there is really such an infinite regress in nature. Will you please tell me how you, or anybody from the scientific community, will give that evidence?

Atheist to Me

That’s idiotic… The whole idea that you can’t have an infinite regress is an artifact of human linguistics and people deliberately misunderstanding Zeno’s paradox.

I don’t have to prove shit. You can feel free to try to disprove an infinite regress but I’m not going to waste my time playing with you fundies. Do your own god damn homework for once!

Better yet, provide some actual reason why it should be impossible.

Me to Atheist

Your comment has very nicely exposed the double standard of atheists.

In the case of God, you people will say that only logic and arguments are not sufficient; some concrete evidence is required.

But in the case of the infinite regress, you will forget your own dictum. Here, you will say that logic and arguments are sufficient; no evidence is required and nothing is to be proved.

In the case of the infinite regress, you atheists are blind believers.

You atheists are hypocrites.

My last comment was deleted twice.���~

Existence of Anything can ultimately point to God.

In an earlier article¹ I have written that God cannot be defined, but that God’s attributes can only be described. And the complete description of this God is this: God is spaceless, timeless, changeless, immortal, all-pervading, one, unborn, uncreated, without any beginning, without an end, everlasting, non-composite and immaterial.

Here I will show that the existence of anything will ultimately point to this God.

If something exists at all, then it can be shown that that will imply that something also exists that is spaceless and timeless, as otherwise there will be an infinite regress.

Now let us start from the earth. Earth exists within the solar system. The solar system exists within the Milky Way galaxy. The Milky Way galaxy exists within the local cluster of galaxies. This cluster again exists within some super-cluster of galaxies. This super-cluster of galaxies exists within the universe. The universe exists within the multiverse that contains billions of other universes. Cosmologists usually stop at this level, they do not want to go beyond the multiverse. But there is no binding that we will have to stop here at the multiverse level at all. So we will say that this multiverse exists within some super-multiverse that contains billions of other multiverses. Then we will again say that this super-multiverse exists within some super-duper multiverse that contains billions of other super-multiverses. Then we will again say that this super-duper multiverse exists within some supra-multiverse that contains billions of other super-duper multiverses. Then we will again say that this supra-multiverse exists within some supra-dupra multiverse that contains billions of other supra-multiverses. And so on and on ad infinitum. But is it possible that we can go on like this indefinitely without stopping somewhere? Can there be an infinite regress in this way? So we will have to stop at some level. But at whichever level we will stop, we will have to say that nothing is there beyond this or that level. So if we decide that we will stop at the universe level, then we will have to say that nothing is there beyond the universe. That means the universe as a whole will be neither in any space nor in any time, because there will be nothing outside the universe. If we stop at the multiverse level, then we will have to say that the multiverse as a whole is neither in any space nor in any time, because there will be nothing outside the multiverse. In each case the entity being as a whole neither in space nor in time will be thus spaceless and timeless. Being spaceless and timeless it will also be changeless, immortal, all-pervading, one, unborn, uncreated, without any beginning, without an end, everlasting and non-composite. This is because all these properties are the default properties of something that is neither in space nor in time.²

Here I want to add one more point. Some atheists argue that they are not afraid of an infinite regress and so they do not require any kind of god/God for stopping this regress. But in reality infinity has no meaning, it is a logical absurdity. If we start counting from 1 and if we want to count up to infinity, then we will never be able to do that even if we are given an infinite amount of time and even if we continue this counting generation after generation. Similarly if we imagine that we are having an infinite past, then from that infinitely past moment this present moment could never be arrived at, because there would always be an infinite number of moments ahead of that infinitely past moment that would have to be elapsed before this present moment could be reached.

Reference:

1. https://sekharpal.wordpress.com/2016/07/14/god-cannot-be-defined-gods-attributes-can-only-be-described/
2. https://sekharpal.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/who-created-god/

 

Why Does The Universe Exist?

The question ‘Why does the universe exist?’ can be answered in two steps:

1) First of all we will have to know as to whether there is any God or not;

2) If we can somehow come to know that there is a God, then we can further ask the question as to why he created the universe. When we will have the answer to this question, we will also come to know as to why the universe exists, why we exist.

The above two have already been answered here¹ and here² respectively.

But even if we somehow come to know the reason as to why the universe exists, yet this will not answer all the questions. This is because we can still ask the question: Why does God exist? If there is a God, then what is the reason that there will have to be a God at all? If we think that there is actually such a reason, then we must keep in mind that we will have to find this reason within God’s existence itself and not outside of it, as otherwise there will be an infinite regress. That means God must have to be a necessary being, not contingent. But what is the reason due to which God will have to exist at all? I think I have already answered this question here³, where I have shown that the existence of nothing is self-contradictory and that therefore only something can exist, and not nothing. I have also shown that simply by default this something will always be spaceless, timeless, changeless, immortal, all-pervading, one, unborn, uncreated, without any beginning, without an end, everlasting and non-composite.

So I think I have answered all the questions that can possibly be asked: Why does God exist? Why does the universe exist? Why do we exist? God will have to be there because existence of nothing is self-contradictory. Being there he will have to create the universe in order to overcome his utter loneliness.

Reference:

1. https://sekharpal.wordpress.com/2016/01/11/is-fine-tuning-actually-required-for-proving-the-existence-of-god/
2. https://sekharpal.wordpress.com/2016/02/07/why-did-god-create-the-universe/
3. https://sekharpal.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/is-there-a-god/

 

 

 

 

Is “Fine Tuning” Actually Required for Proving the Existence of God?

It is not actually necessary that “fine tuning” of certain parameters will have to exist in reality for proving the existence of God. I think light with its very peculiar properties is sufficient for that purpose.

Light originates within space and time but it goes beyond space and time. A photon coming from a star lying at a distance of one billion light-years from earth will take one billion years of earth’s time to reach the surface of the earth. During these one billion years of earth’s time it will be in a spaceless and timeless condition, because the distance between the star and the earth has become zero for it and time has also stopped. So it will be neither in space nor in time during the total period of its existence. Then it will cease to be by being absorbed by something or someone on earth.

So light originating within space and time goes beyond space and time, because space and time become non-existent for it. And we cannot claim that this is without any cause. As light is not a conscious entity, so neither can we claim here that light has the capability of deciding its own fate that it will go beyond space and time. So this must have been caused by something else. But whatever may be the cause of it, this cause cannot lie within space and time; it is impossible. Let us suppose that this cause is A and that it lies within space and time. We can now ask two questions about A:

1) Are space and time non-existent for A also?

2) Or, are they not non-existent for A?

If 2), then how can A cause space and time becoming non-existent for light when they are not non-existent for A itself? But if 1), then we will have to ask the same question about A that we were earlier asking about light: what causes space and time becoming non-existent for A, when we know very well that A lies within space and time? So we see that A cannot be the ultimate cause that makes space and time non-existent for light, because here we will have to find out again the cause that makes space and time non-existent for A itself. In this way it can be shown that there will be an infinite regress, and that there is nothing within space and time that can be this cause. So ultimately we will have to go beyond space and time in search of this cause. A cause that lies within space and time is a natural cause, but a cause that lies beyond space and time is not a natural cause; it is a supernatural cause. So the cause that makes space and time non-existent for light is a supernatural cause.

Now one can raise an objection here that it cannot be the case that light is neither in space nor in time, because we can see the star and therefore the photon must have existed in some space-time during its transition from the star to the earth. But in which space and for how long did it exist during this transition? This is because the equations of SR show that both the travel time and the travel distance have become zero for light. So if SR as a theory is correct, then light cannot, and does not, exist in any space for any time.

Some may also think that SR is a bad theory and that it requires immediate replacement, because the conclusions that can be drawn from this theory are so counter-intuitive and contradictory to our commonsensical and everyday notion of existence. Here anybody can offer a better theory if he/she thinks so and get it accepted by the peers before challenging a well-established theory of science.

About light one can also read the article “The Fundamental Nature of Light” by Dr. Sascha Vongehr in Science 2.0 (February 3^rd, 2011)¹

Ref:

1. http://www.science20.com/alpha_meme/fundamental_nature_light-75861