Should Atheists take a physics lesson?

Stephen Hawking would not say that "the Universe has not existed forever" he would say "all timelike world-lines to which we have access, followed backwards, terminate in the singularity of the Big Bang after a finite amount of proper time." That's not really quite the same thing, unless by the "Universe" you mean "our Big Bang". Most physicists nowadays would allow that the "Universe" may be a good deal bigger in both time and space than "our Big Bang". Specifically, reality may be past-eternal.

The "Laws of Thermodynamics" are statistical in nature --- they describe average properties of ensembles of particles. They are "laws" in the same sense that "you can't win the Megabucks lottery" is a law --- true almost all the time but not guaranteed to be true absolutely all the time.

There are plenty of examples in nature of complexity arising from simpler origins without the intervention of intelligence: "spontaneous symmetry breaking", the formation of stars and planets, and evolution of species are examples. The existence of a complex thing does not therefore require the existence of an even more complex thing to create it. (We used to think this was true, that complexity always results from even greater complexity, and in that case it makes sense that the first thing, the "First Cause" is the most complex thing of all; we now know this isn't true, and so perhaps the First Cause could be unintelligent.)

We now know that the early Universe was utterly simple --- as simple as it could possibly be, given that (1) it existed and (2) it obeyed the laws of physics. We don't know how it originated. That may be because we don't understand field theory and quantum gravity well enough. That doesn't mean that any natural laws were broken, only that we don't understand everything about the workings of nature at extremely high temperatures and densities where quantum gravity dominates.

Yes the universe has not existed forever -- in it's present form. It may have pre-existed in a different state, such as a singularity for some unknown amount of time. Making speculations about what is beyond the temporal horizon is not a fruitful activity, and assuming that it was pre-existing or that it formed at the moment of the Big Bang is not basing your argument on fact, just speculation.

The universe is not considered to be a closed system - sorry - you're way off base there. The universe is considered finite but unbounded, which is not equivalent to a thermodynamic closed system.

Since both your stated assumptions are not true, your conclusion is not correct.

Physicists don't say that matter/energy first came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang. It was already there, and changed state. Here's your basic choice: Either simple matter/energy always existed, it can pop in and out of existence easily, or an impossibly complex entity capable of speaking matter into existence and violating the laws of physics always existed. Which is more likely? Occam's Razor says the first. Don't multiply entities beyond reason; in other words, don't assume a god where one is not necessary. Science has not found one single thing in the origins of the universe that would have required divine intervention.

You didn't prove anything, you merely asserted that since you don't understand the relevant science, a god must have done everything. You did not offer any support for that assertion.

If you want to argue science, go have a word with the believers who say that since matter cannot be created or destroyed it must have been created.

I don't know.

Where is the evidence suggesting your god exists? Your god doesn't have a first cause?

EDIT: Special pleading. Science says NOTHING about something that can exist for eternity.

The Universe before the Big Bang was technically just all the energy packed into a minuscule little tiny space. The Big Bang occurred, which was technically the "birth" of the universe. This caused the rapid expansion of what is now known as the universe.

Energy can be converted into matter. In order for the Universe to keep an equilibrium, some energy had to be converted into matter. Therefore, all the objects you see around you are the result of this.

"The universe has not existed forever"

It has in one formor another.

"(This natural law is verified by Stephen hawking)."

LINK ?

"The universe is a closed system."

LINK

1. I didn't read any further cos you just made a bunch of baseless statements.

2. Gods and magic are the most ludicrous things primitive man ever came up with to explain anything... he may as well have suggested that a one-eyed Turtle with the assistance of half a dozen near-naked, flat-chested Flamingos did it... ;)

Oh, and if you were fair dinkum about seeking an answer to this issue you'd be asking in the SCIENCE Section.

~

HONEST people ask Science questions in the appropriate Science section.

DISHONEST people ask Science questions in R&S, because they don't WANT an actual answer based on Science.

Thank you for making it so clear which kind of asker you are.

"Does it mean, if you don’t understand something, and the community of physicists don’t understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? Because if it is, here’s a list of things in the past that the physicists at the time didn't understand [and now we do understand.] If that’s how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on - so just be ready for that to happen, if that’s how you want to come at the problem."~Neil deGrasse Tyson

-If the Universe needs a creator, why doesn't god?

If god doesn't need a creator, why does the Universe ?-

No, why? What exactly does any of that have to do with belief (or non-belief) in any god?

>>The question, "but what created that?" has to end somewhere. It ends with God.<<

That's a cop-out bred from ignorance.

And if you would actually "stop believing in God" from what someone says here, then your faith isn't very strong. Maybe you should work on that.

Edit: Fyi, there is nothing about this question that deserves "serious attention".

"So if the universe hasn't lasted forever, and nothing can be created or destroyed, which law is broken?"

None. You dont' get to change definitions in mid-sentence and expect to get away with it.

"The question, "but what created that?" has to end somewhere. It ends with God."

Why God? And why specifically YOUR God?

The universe might be a closed system (I have heard hypothesis suggesting otherwise),

In fact; energy and matter are constantly in exchange and thus new energy and matter are, somewhere, being introduced to the system via stars synthesising elements and creating radiation by fusing hydrogen and other light elements.

Well, the universe before the big bang was so compressed, that it existed before time, so it could break the laws of physics when the before the big bang, but after the big bang, the universe was created and so was time, physics and all the stars. No creator necessary.