The Uncaused Cause - Cosmological Argument

@AlbertEinstein1905:

Surely humans weren't present from the very beginning of the universe.

Universe was formed a few billion years ago.

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

yes consider it could be anything, just anything, particle/quark/string/etc

now let us point to farthest position we can think of, and stay there. the question is: can there be any creation starting from that position or ended at that position?

@AlbertEinstein1905 :

Um maybe not.

Some theories say it's like a loop that'll happen again and again, I mean there would happen something that would totally destroy everything and then again another big bang would create another universe again.

And this loop may go on forever

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

you mean one big bang came from previous big bang?

@AlbertEinstein1905 :

Yeah..... But no creation isn’t really a possibility, because if there was no creation , how did we end up with this gigantic universe and where did everything came from.

And yeah about there will always be a new creation.... That until now seems quite reasonable

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:
yes, now to handle possible option, we have to tackle one by one,

supposely the position we called "x", and:
if there is NO NEW creation at that point “x” => then there can be always traced back from "x" position to the current position right? current position to be considered you or me

@AlbertEinstein1905:

Well suppose you took “x” as somewhere close to 500 BCE

Then yeah between x and the current position there has been no creation.

And let’s be clear here.....by creation we mean the universal creation , right ?

The creation that happens after the destruction of everything or

the creation that creates the very first particle Hopefully we're on the same page . I guess.

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

yes, the creation that creates the "x" — before the "x", before 500 bce

@AlbertEinstein1905 :

Well there still was a universe.

Um if you're talking about the very first point of creation, well that's unknown.

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

"x" may be represented as the sequence of anything. if we put "x" as part of the sequence of humanity, then going back to previous sequence may be considered finding the relevant creations (although not always be like that), it's to simplifying understanding, so that we can see the building blocks clearly, so that we can twist understanding properly within boundary

then now we can see "x" as it can be replaced with anything, we can replace "x" with universe or even smaller, then before "x" could be anything (another universe or else) as the cause of universe "x"

so if we consider there was nothing new at that position "x" then at least to that sequence there is no other creation, all summed up the same, there is no additional of something

• previous (typically book)
• previous (typically matter)
• previous (typically universe)
• previous (typically pencil)

@AlbertEinstein1905 :

Okay so you mean:

if there is a universe x then it’s cause is the universe or anything that was before it.

@AlbertEinstein1905 :

Um there would be a previous thing, but as no creation happened so it wouldn’t have that many differences.

The differences won't be there , but another thing might be present.

So if we see no new thing in x then there's nothing that happened before it, otherwise it could've created something.

@AlbertEinstein1905:

So if y is before x , and if there is nothing new in x

Then x and y have to be equal, not that they’re one and the same but that the things aren’t that different.

So no creation happened in “y”

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

this is it, great

supposely we admit there is a chance for a NEW creation at the farthest point we may have (as previous example, point "x"), then there will be an "y" as a NEW creation

@AlbertEinstein1905:

ok so you’re saying if there is the chances of creation at point x , then as y is the cause of x then the cause of creation must arise from Y , because everything that occurs at “x” is related to Y , so there must be creation at “y”

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

yes, now we can expand it a little bit more ... before “y” there are again & again previous new things

more to come the new one more than one infinitely

@AlbertEinstein1905 :

Yeah.... There are many pairs

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

y(n)

so since those are the new ones, then we can say there are the causes at the opposite direction

• "x" is the cause of y, y is the cause of y(n)
• "x" (the cause of) -> x(n)
• "x" (the cause of) -> y(n)

@AlbertEinstein1905 :

Okay as “x” is the cause of x(n) then the creation of x(n) is due to the creation in x , and thus x(n) is caused by x.

Ⓢⓔⓡⓔⓜⓞⓝⓘⓐ:

doing so, will lead to the fact that , since x(n) created by x , and y was created/came from x, therefore there is the end point, it’s the x (the first cause)

@AlbertEinstein1905:

Ah....creation at x(n) is caused by “x”, and we had assumed in the beginning that x was also the cause of “y”, and y(n).

But how is this the endpoint ?

@AlbertEinstein1905:

you can't find the cause of x, at least to a specific sequence

• there could be anykind of timeline/sequence,
• there could be different kind of causal chain
• there could be more than one timeline of causality (causal chain)

there could be more endpoints, more first causes, more gods