Re: [asa] Thermodynamics & Eternal Universe - A Question

From: James Patterson <>
Date: Wed Oct 01 2008 - 14:04:30 EDT

Eternity has no beginning or end.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 1, 2008, at 12:37 PM, Christine Smith <
> wrote:

> Hi all,
> A quick question to all the physicists out there...I was reading one
> of the articles on the ASA faith-science new blog, and came across
> the following:
> "Materialistic explanations of the universe have to rely on one of
> two explanations for where the universe came from. The first is that
> the universe is eternal. This idea runs into problems almost
> immediately because of the second law of thermodynamics. This law
> states that the useable energy in a closed system is constantly
> decreasing, which means that an eternally old universe would have
> run out of useful energy by now. To solve this problem, some
> physicists argue that the universe can reset itself periodically by
> collapsing and re-forming in what is known as an oscillating
> universe. While there are logical problems with this idea (see
> William Lane Craig’s The Kalam Cosmological Argument), it still leav
> es us with our current universe having a starting point."
> My question is...if the universe is argued to be eternal, does the
> 2nd law of thermodynamics even make sense to begin with? I'm having
> a hard time conceptualizing the argument without a reference to
> time, as in "why should we assume the energy would have run out by
> now?...what if we're close to the beginning of eternity?"
> Thanks ahead of time for your responses :)
> In Christ,
> Christine (ASA member, who's definitely not a physicist)
> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Oct 1 14:05:31 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Oct 01 2008 - 14:05:31 EDT