Cosmological argument: Difference between revisions

In the sub-atomic realm, virtual particles and other types of [[particles]] offer evidence for a contradictory to premise 1, particles seemingly come into being for a moment then disappear into the quantum vacuum. When the quantum vacuum fluctuates it spins off particles and then they disappear back into the vacuum. This gives the appearance of particles spontaneously popping into existence out of nothing, but this is misleading. The popular interpretation given to the public is that of a quantum physics that supports things spontaneously popping into existence.<ref>[http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/02/why-are-some-physicists-so-bad-at.html Why are (some) physicists so bad at philosophy?] Edward Feser blog</ref> The quantum vacuum that underlies all of reality is a rich energy, and thus is something however. Proponents of non-causal determination quantum physics have no interplay with other popular and viable models and thus substantial interpretations within their writings. This is not a viable objection simply because the quantum vacuum is something, and there are many models of quantum physics that give quantum physics causal determination.<ref>[http://www.rfmedia.org/RF_audio_video/Defender_podcast/20040502CosmologicalArgumentPart1.mp3 Cosmological Argument #1] Teaching class by William Lane Craig</ref>