Trust in the Lord:
But it's not random, it even has a prediction timeline saying when a half life is. I understand any one molecule changing from another is less predictable, but it's not random, rather, we just have not seen the cause. I know you understand the difference.
Actually, as far as we can tell, it IS random. That's what I'm getting at. At the quantum level, things don't happen the same way they do at the scales we're used to. The rules are very different to what we're used to. And one of the ways that it appears to be different is that things really are random and unpredictable. Not in the way that we're used to, where if we just knew a all the starting conditions better we'd be able to better predict the outcome, but it a fundamental way. You simply cannot tell when an individual nucleus is going to decay. Not like "we don't know how to tell", but like "the laws of physics seem to say its impossible to know." It's weird, really. And people have worked really, really hard to show that it's not that way, but it keeps turning out to be that way. Its part of why quantum mechanics is so hard to do, because it's so different from what we consider to be common sense. But it seems that at the quantum level, reality just don't obey commons sense.
Trust in the Lord:
Virtual particles? Couldn't they come up with a better name, like imaginary particles? ;)
So tell me more about virtual particles.
Here's the
Wiki entry on them. It's fairly heady stuff, but it's not something I'm making up. Again, when you look deeply enough into how the universe works, common sense seems to break down. I don't claim to have a great understanding of it. I just know enough to know that assuming things work at that level like they do at our scales usually leads to big mistakes.
Trust in the Lord:
Since we typically don't see that begin to exist without a cause, why assume the universe doesn't have a cause then?
We don't "typically" see anything about the universe, though. We've got one example to go one. I've seen many soccer balls. I've seen many things
inside the universe. But I've only ever seen one universe (and I haven't seen but a tiny, tiny fraction of it).
Trust in the Lord:
Since this seems like a pretty basic concept, why can't you agree that all things that begin to exist has a cause?
Because it's not clear to me that that that is true at these levels. I've mentioned a couple cases of things that seem to begin "without a cause" already. And I've pointed out that our common-sense ideas for things like footballs and rocks and trees just don't apply at the quantum (and relativistic) scales. I'm not necessarily saying that what you say is definitely wrong, just that I'm not ready to make the leap to believing it's true. I don't know if things can start without a cause or not at the quantum level. You're sure that they can't, and that's great for you, but I'm guessing you don't understand quantum mechanics all that much better than I do, so your reason for being so sure isn't based on expertise, but just on a strong gut feeling. I don't have that strong gut feeling.
Trust in the Lord:
Because of a virtual particle? Because you have a couple possible ideas, that means it's ludicrous to go further with the concept that the universe has a cause?
No, it's just not logical to adopt an assumption as true if we're not actually sure that it IS true. Your argument depends on this assumption, but I'm not convinced that assumption is true.
Trust in the Lord:
If something is the cause of God, then whatever caused God is God, because if something caused God, then it is more powerful than God. God is the most powerful being in existence. Anything less is not God.
Ah, okay, then I can demonstrate the universe doesn't have a cause too then. See, if something caused the universe, it must be bigger than the universe, but since the universe is the biggest thing there is, nothing could have caused it. Ta da! See, it's not very convincing, is it? It depends on assumptions which you don't share, so it's not going to change your mind. Likewise, what you said doesn't convince me, because it's just based on your assumptions, which I don't share.
Trust in the Lord:
So if there were a premise we could agree with, would you agree that if atheism is true, then there is no explanation for the universe?
Depends on what you mean by that. Do you mean that I don't have an explanation? Sure, I can agree with that. There are many things I can't explain. But do you mean that no explanation is possible? No, I wouldn't agree with that.
Trust in the Lord:
If you understand the cause of the universe, but not the cause of the cause of the universe, you still know more than not knowing the cause of the universe.
But we don't "understand" the cause, you're just trying to logic one into existence to fix an identified problem. But if that problem isn't solved (ie, something still exists without a cause) then the solution you propose doesn't actually seem correct.
Finally, you might have missed the bit I posted after my other post. It raised the question of whether something that has existed during every moment of time "has a beginning". Cosmologists sometimes say that time didn't exist before the big bang, so there was no "before" the big bang. I'll admit I struggle to wrap my head around what that even means. But if it's true, the universe perhaps didn't have a beginning at all, since it existed at every moment of time. There was no time you could look back to and say "Here! At this instant the universe didn't exist, and then a bit later it did!" Can you provide a firm definition of "has a beginning" that avoids that issue?
Another thought: You believe that its possible for something to exist without a cause (God). But this is the ONLY thing for which you feel this is the case, right? If not, can you give another example of something that exists without a cause? Because if not, I propose you're stuck in the same jam as the rest of us. You have to assume that something exists without a cause (and you DO make that assumption). But you deny us that option. You don't let us say "well, there's only 1 thing that exists without a cause, and it's the universe itself." Which makes it seem like we're both stuck by the same issue, to me.