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> Appealing to the realm of quantum physics and trying to question premise 1 because the particles seem not to have any causal determinate is not unfamiliar territory to defenders of the kalam cosmological argument. There are two important understandings of quantum physics that go overlooked; firstly the quantum vacuum is something so that what seems to be popping into existence are fluctuations of the vacuum and secondly there are viable alternative models of quantum physics that give causal determination and maintain [[mathematical]] consistency.<ref>[http://www.rfmedia.org/RF_audio_video/Defender_podcast/20040502CosmologicalArgumentPart1.mp3 Cosmological Argument #1] Teaching class by William Lane Craig</ref>