The Laws of Thermodynamics Prove the Existence of God

The universe is in a process from it’s first state in which there was little if no entropy and was unstable to a final state of the spatial homogeneity of matter/energy. At present, matter and dark matter is concentrated in stars, galaxies, etc, and so the universe is not in thermodynamic equilibrium yet and objects can do physical work. That process is on-going and found to be an irreversible natural process. Extrapolating backwards, then, the universe cannot be eternal. If the universe were eternal, matter/energy would be in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium. But it’s not.

The 2nd law shows that natural processes lead to spatial homogeneity of matter and energy. Further, there is no apparent law for a decrease of entropy. Hence, there is no natural explanation for how the process from the singularity state, which was not in thermodynamic equilibrium, to the final state of thermodynamic equilibrium, can be averted or reversed. Hence, the universe is in the midst a process from a beginning to an end.

Thus, the second law tells us that the matter/energy is not eternal; it was created. The first law says that the universe has no capacity to create matter/energy. Hence, the first cause cannot be part of the universe since the universe has no natural ability to create matter/energy. So, the universe is not eternal and cannot create itself. Therefore, there must be a Creator beyond the universe. This we call “God”.

God can be neither proved nor disproved. It requires faith.

5 Likes

Fair enough.

More neutrally, it began.

More accurately, the First Law says that the laws of physics (as we understand them) do not permit the creation of energy within this observable universe. But one thing we know about the very early universe is that the laws of physics as we know them break down there. We simply do not know what happens or can happen at the beginning of something like our observable universe. “The universe we see is not eternal and we don’t know what caused it” is a fair statement. Identifying that ignorance with “God” seems like a stretch.

6 Likes

The Laws of Thermodynamics Prove the Existence of God

Incorrect.

This sounds reasonable. But I am not sure if is this just because we have other evidence that the measurable universe had a beginning? Those who imagine that the universe is part of some large system may easily object that the 2nd law only applies to limited portions. I am not prepared to accept the ideas on this either way. I would only state the current state of scientific knowledge according to what we can demonstrate, which is that the measurable universe began 13.8 billion years ago.

Incorrect.

All physical processes consist of the conversion of energy from one form to another even to create matter.

It does not follow that the cause is an intelligent purposeful being. Other people call the cause from outside the space-time structure created 13.8 billion years ago something else such as the natural law of the greater or higher dimension existence from which this universe arose.

That I personally believe the cause is an intelligent purposeful being is a matter of faith based on my own subjective reasons. The most I can do is point out that the beliefs of others to the contrary are no less subjective than my own.

1 Like

Since the universe is everything, by definition, the universe is a closed system.
The 2nd law shows that natural processes lead to spatial homogeneity of matter/energy. That is, it is in a process toward “heat death” (i.e. thermodynamic equilibrium.) That’s the scientific law. In order to carry on a rational conversation, we have to agree to accept facts, not simply deny them.
Matter is, ultimately, a form of energy, and vice versa. For example, e=mc2 is a formula for how energy equates to matter. The universe has no capacity to create matter/energy. Matter might be converted to energy and vice versa but it is never destroyed or diminished.
Since nature has no capacity to create itself and since it was created, therefore there must be a creator beyond nature, by definition supernatural.

The laws of nature prove that there is a God.

Inaccurate. It states that nature cannot create matter/energy (one thing that maybe in the form of matter or energy) but there is no known law of physics allowing the universe to create matter/energy. In other words, the universe has no capacity to create itself.

This is an appeal to mystery. It’s basically saying, ‘Maybe the laws of physics aren’t always true so we can fantasize about other outcomes and not have to follow the logical consequences of the laws of physics.’

We do know what caused the universe. The universe was created and could not create itself. Therefore, it must have been created by a creator outside the laws of nature, by definition, supernatural, by definition God.

Like you I believe in something greater than what is under my control and that there is greater wisdom than I alone possess. Like you I do not think my belief transfers any of that greatness and wisdom to my actions or attempts to understand. My desire to align with that greatness and to serve its ends does not erase my own limitations. Thus my intentions though honorable do not render my choices holy. But many are confused about this.

2 Likes

Please see my response above.

You’re generalizing the known laws of physics beyond the regime in which we can test them, based on your faith that they’re absolute. That’s not a scientific conclusion – there is no experiment you can do to test your hypothesis. We do not know (and possibly cannot know) whether other universes with different laws can or do exist, or whether processes that we do not observe within this observable universe apply to its origin.

When we don’t know something, we don’t know it. Acknowledging that reality isn’t appealing to mystery – it’s stating a fact. Known laws of physics have been shown to break down really badly when you try to apply them outside the regime they were formulated for – try applying Newtonian mechanics to ultra-relativistic particles, for example. You’re assuming that that can’t happen again. Why? Especially since we do know that the known laws of physics don’t work under the conditions early in the universe: gravity has to be incorporated into quantum interactions, and we don’t know the right way of doing that.

Might I ask what your background in physics is?

4 Likes

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

I do believe in God, but I don’t believe the laws of nature prove this, since God is outside of time and space and not part of the natural world. How would that work? And how does it prove one God vs many gods?

2 Likes

I just shown here that the laws of thermodynamics prove that there is a God.

I’ve heard that also.

Showed. And you’d deserve a Nobel and the Papacy at least if you had,

You do make unsupported assertions more convincing by denigrating those who question them. Nor does dismissing those who know more about physics than you do as non-serious people who want to escape reason do anything for your credibility.

6 Likes

Do you have a working theory of quantum gravity?

1 Like

I haven’t made any supported claims. People who talk about other “universes” are doing that.

@glipsnort. I’m a very simple minded man as you know. Quite unremarkably dim with a capital bee… But dogged. Should that be bogged? As in down? The laws of physics are ergonomic, deterministic. They are what they dysteleologically have to be. Especially the measured constants that crystallize out at the vertices of intersecting forces. In at least 11 dimensions isn’t it? Up to 17? Nature self tunes. Always to the same measured constants. That has to be the default until proven otherwise. They are prevenient of God who has to humbly choose to accept them, to instantiate them or do nothing. They are modified at the extremes as Newton in Einstein. Newton is a subset of Einstein. I see no reason whatsoever to break the conservation laws, that the laws of thermodynamics don’t apply in an infinite ‘closed’ system. Closed-open become meaningless at infinity. Infinity is real. In time. Immutable. I have an ‘O’ level in physics.

And what’s that you said about quantum gravity?

“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6

This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.