Phil Halper (aka Skydivephil)
Before the Big Bang 9: A Multiverse from Nothing
updated
Here two of the world's leading cosmologists debate whether the universe had a beginning or not.
Featuring Thomas Herzog who was one of Stephen Hawking's main collaborators on his No Boundary or Hartle/Hawking model and Robert Brandenberger one of the authors (along with leading string theorist Cumrun Vafa) of Sting Gas Cosmology.
Thomas's book One the Origins of Time, can be found here:
amazon.co.uk/Origin-Time-Stephen-Hawkings-theory/dp/1911709089
and my upcoming book, The Battle of the Big Bang can be pre ordered here:
https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/B/bo244963115.html
Our film on the No Boundary Proposal which starred Stephen Hawking, Jim Hartle and Thomas Herzog can be found here:
youtube.com/watch?v=Ry_pILPr7B8&t=1569s
A timeline is below
00:00 Introduction
1:10 on being Stephen Hawking's PHD student
2:17 Robert's story
4:02 Does the CMB prove a beginning?
7:52 Penrose Hawking Singularity
17:15 Inflation and the BGV theory
24:38 The Hartle Hakwing No Boundary Proposal
36:14 Emergent universe
46:14 Holography
58:00 Entropy
65:00 Can we even know if the universe begun?
A timeline of the show is here:
00:00 introduction
3:00 fine-tuning and problem of evil
29:07 crazy coincidence
33:32 Goff's theory of the atonement
50:39 the resurrection
59:59 Origins of Christianity
1:01:00 Morality
You can read Goff's article here: aeon.co/essays/i-now-think-a-heretical-form-of-christianity-might-be-true
and Alexs blog post is here:
useofreason.wordpress.com
And how could astronomers find them out there in the cosmos?
Two of the world's leading experts, Vitor Cardoso and Niayesh Afshordi discuss these fascinating topics.
Our black hole playlist is here:
youtube.com/watch?v=smMrjKU7aWc&list=PLJ4zAUPI-qqoP-kAJmaXJwllMtrPpy1cV
#science #physics #space #blackholes
00:00 Introduction
1:23 Roger Penrose
1:55 How to build a black hole bomb
3:19 Naturally forming black hole bombs
4:53 gravitational waves
5:36 Astronomers hunt for black hole bombs
6:41 The ultimate weapon in the universe
youtube.com/watch?v=E7DVA1QisZI&t=1666s
Do new measurements rule the theory out, as Biran Keating claimed in a new video? Watch here to find out the truth, not the hype.
If you want to see what loop theorists say about the theory, watch our documentary starring Carlo Rovelli, Abhay Ashtekar, Lee Smolin, Francesca Vidotto, and Aurelien Barrau. They discuss the history of loop quantum gravity and what it means for big questions like what's inside a black hole and what happened before the Big Bang?
youtube.com/watch?v=x9jYH5VIF9E&t=3708s
A timeline of this film is below
00:00 Introduction, Penrose and the singularity
00:15 Biran Keating's claims re loop quantum gravity and string theory
00:39 PBS Space-time claims
00:52 Fermilab claims
1:10 Carlo Rovelli refutes the Yotubers
A link to Brian's video is here:
youtube.com/watch?v=S5CzrLuCRS4&t=59s
A link to PBS Spacetime here
youtube.com/watch?v=L2suMPiuog4&t=826s
and to Fermi labs video here:
youtube.com/watch?v=QMpkFde3euA&t=481s
00:00 Introduction
1:54 debunking the contingency argument
12:48 human worth
22:31 Voltaire
44:40 debunking the fine-tuning argument
53:25 The problem of evil
A link to our fine-tuning film is here:
youtube.com/watch?v=jJ-fj3lqJ6M&t=2476s
And our discussion with Neil Manson on hidden assumptions of fine-tuning is here:
youtube.com/watch?v=2NJfASa9Aig&t=130s
00:00 Introduction
00:43 Roger Penrose on Singualrities
00:55 Roger Pernose talk on black holes
1:40 Stephen Hawking wasn't there
2:21 Big Bang singularity
2:31 Stephen Hawkings Phd thesis
#stephenhawking
#universe
#rogerpenrose
youtube.com/watch?v=83oX2Q6LGmA&t=58s
However, Subboor claimed a victory, as Sober didn't explicitly claim that Suboor misrepresented him. In this video, Elliott Sober replies to that claim, and it is not good news for the creationist Subboor.
00:00 introduction
00:26 debunking creationism
1:24 misrepresented
1:45 nature of science
3:40 evolution of aquatic predators
#sciencevsreligion
#atheism
#evolution
#pathein
The content Elliott reviews is mostly drawn from a debate I had with Subboor; the full debate can be found here:
youtube.com/watch?v=85P4X0K-1cY&t=3589s
The beginning section is taken from Suboor's video here:
youtube.com/watch?v=VzFkaPtDDlQ&t=5s
The penultimate clip is from this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=_pyXEmKT9UQ&t=215s
A timeline can be found here:
00;00Introduction
03:05 DNA crime analogy
06:03 Assumption of atheism and naturlsism?
12:11 genetic evidence for evolution
18:46 Nothing new?
22:41 Ants not chimps
27:32 Elliott's quote
33:47 natural selection
36:20 more genetic evidence
40:31 a racist argument?
44:36 probabilities
47:36 fossil evidence
50:31 debunking creationism
#sciencevsreligion
#atheist
#evolution
Pews research can be found here on climate change
pewresearch.org/religion/2022/11/17/religious-groups-views-on-climate-change
on evolution
pewresearch.org/religious-landscape-study/database
We consider the claim that multiverse is a logical fallacy and delve into Neils paper"How not be generous to fine tuning skeptics."
With myself Phil Halper and Alex Malpass.
Neil can be found at this website:
https://philosophy.olemiss.edu/neil-a-manson/
Timeline
00:00 Introduction
1:57 multiverse and the inverse gamblers fallacy
7:58 whats wrong with inverse gamblers fallacy
18:44 survey of cosmologists
22:27 Neils paper
31:20 fine tuning vs God
41:00 fine tuning vs idealism
52:20 fine tuning vs miracles
57:00 fine tuning vs science
1:11:00 probability problems
However, leading relativists say Kerr makes simple errors, and his conclusion is totally unfounded. Here, we talk to these experts and explain how science popularisers got their physics so badly wrong. Nobody claims that singularities are real, but the singularity theories are powerful signposts to new physics, probably requiring a quantum theory of gravity to resolve.
A timeline of the video is here:
00:00 introduction
01:20 Need for quantum gravity
02:20 geodesic
5:00 types of geodesics
5:35 types of time
6:20 affine parameter
8:16 Kerr's argument
10:37 Highly misleading
12:28 Finding Kerr's core error
15:18 PBs space-time
17:50 The mistake of the Popularisers
20:40 We are not idiots
A timeline of topics is here:
00:00 Introdcution
02:46 Evolution and the brain
15:54 Did Christianity give us science ?
26:57 Conflict between science and religion
33:28 Genesis
44:05 Dawkins
54:16 Comsology
1:10:47 Problem of evil
A new paper suggests the answer may be yes to both. I interviewed David Kaiser, one of the paper's co-authors, former student of inflationary cosmology pioneer Alan Guth, and now Professor of Physics and Professor of the History of Science at MIT.
For the preprint of the full paper:
arxiv.org/pdf/2310.16877
and other press about the paper
lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n11/david-kaiser/black-hole-flyby
https://news.mit.edu/2024/exotic-black-holes-could-be-dark-matter-byproduct-0606
And some other related papers:
journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.231402
arxiv.org/abs/2303.02168
arxiv.org/abs/2312.17217
a timeline is below
00:00 introduction
00:57 primordial black holes
3:05 particle dark matter and modified gravity
6:33 LIGO and EHT
11:03 window of opportunity
15:16 observaitonal signatures
20:30 Apollo era tech
25:19 Star Wars
25:54 the future
youtube.com/watch?v=pGKe6YzHiME
youtube.com/watch?v=femxJFszbo8&t=1411s
But there is now a "new" Kalam based on Benardete paradoxes such as the Grim Reaper which are meant to establish something called causal finitism. What are these paradoxes ? and how can a critic of the Kalam respond?Well our very own Alex Malpass has teamed up with Joe Schmid of the Majesty of Reason and published a paper in one of the worlds leading philosophy journals Mind.
You can find that here
philarchive.org/rec/SCHBPC
We talk about this paper and related issue and see why how to reply to this new Kalam.
A timeline is here:
00:00 introduction
2:40 Grim Reaper paradox
7:43 The Kalam argument
9:25 Causal Finitism
12:40 The UPD
23:05 The Problem with causal finitism
37:20 Physics
44:30 Mysterious Force
57:33 The Patchwork Principle
Joe's papers on this topic:
“Branching Actualism and Cosmological Arguments”, Philosophical Studies (2023, with Alex Malpass). Here we use branching actualism to criticize the use of patchwork principles in support of the Grim Reaper Kalam.
philpapers.org/rec/SCHBAA-22
“Benardete paradoxes, patchwork principles, and the infinite past”, Synthese (2024). Here I develop another problem for the use of patchwork principles in support of the Grim Reaper Kalam.
philarchive.org/rec/SCHBPP-3#:~:text=Benardete%20paradoxes%20involve%20a%20beginningless,impossibility%20of%20an%20infinite%20past.
“The End is Near: Grim Reapers and Endless Futures”, Mind (Forthcoming). Here I criticize the Grim Reaper Kalam by developing a symmetrical Kalam-style parody argument, based on a future-oriented Benardete paradox, for the impossibility of an endless future.
academic.oup.com/mind/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/mind/fzad065/7492631?redirectedFrom=fulltext
“Grim Reaper Paradoxes and Patchwork Principles: Severing the Case for Finitism”, Journal of Philosophy (Forthcoming, with Troy Dana). Here we develop two problems for the Grim Reaper Kalam. One is a companions in guilt argument based on a new finite Benardete-like paradox. Another relates to a mistaken assumption about the intrinsicality of the Reapers’ realized powers/dispositions.
philarchive.org/rec/SCHGRP-4
“Benardete Paradoxes, Causal Finitism, and the Unsatisfiable Pair Diagnosis”, Mind (Forthcoming, with Alex Malpass). Here we argue that the unsatisfiable pair diagnosis is the best solution to Benardete paradoxes, and in particular that it is much better than causal finitism. We also raise yet another challenge to the use of patchwork principles on behalf of the Grim Reaper Kalam.
philarchive.org/rec/SCHBPC
Here are my tips for understanding the space weather forecast so you don't miss the next big Northern Lights display.
Useful links :
spaceweather.com
solarham.com
google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=sapcxeweather+live&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
aurora-alerts.uk
Timeline:
00:00 Introduction
2:37 infinity
10:12 The SURGE argument and the 2nd law
22:39 expanding universe
28:41 radiation
42:08 Galaxy seeds
49:51 Einstein
1:02:43 Creation ex nihilo
Tmeline:
00:00 Intrdocution
00:48 I was a Hawking's student
1:49 The information paradox
4:42 string theory
7:16 solving the information paradox
10:36 Fuzzballs
12:39 tunneling into a black hole
14:50 Looking inside a black hole
15:49 Echoes
20"07 Blakc hole Imaging
21:07 VECRO energy
22:35 cosmology and inflation
24:41 The Big Bang
26:3 Black Hole Gas
The authors, Patrick Gasd and Nina Lanza used the ChemCam instrument on NASA's Curiosity Rover and found elevated levels of manganese. What does this mean? COuld it be a sing of alien life , what does it say about anient conditions on Mars? Were they Earth like? Lets find out
Science news outlets around the world have reported a possible "cosmic glitch" in the universe.
We chatted with one of the authors of the paper that made this claim.
Niayesh Afshordi and I discuss what motivates it, how it was tested, and how it might be further tested in the future. Most importantly, what impact it might have on the very origin of the universe. Might we have to rethink cosmology and consider what was before the Big Bang?
00:00 Introduction
2:23 motivation
5:32 Hubble tension
9:15 Return of the ether
12:00 Quantum gravity
13:25 observations
15:40 S8 tension
18:00 Big Bang
20:00 future tests
In this episode of the SciPhi Show, leading atheist philosophers Alex Malpass and Dan Linford examine what this might mean for the Kalam Cosmological Argument. In particular, we show that it faces an "interface dilemma" where defenders of the argument, like William Lane Craig, must give up one of the Kalam's fundamental premises.
For my videos on the early unvierse, see here:
youtube.com/watch?v=Ry_pILPr7B8&list=PLJ4zAUPI-qqqj2D8eSk7yoa4hnojoCR4m
For the Kalam, see here:
youtube.com/watch?v=pGKe6YzHiME&t=2798s
and here
youtube.com/watch?v=femxJFszbo8&t=761s
For Dan's paper, see here:
arxiv.org/abs/2006.08890
a timecode is below
0:00 Introduction
1:21 What is the Kalam?
3:11 Hourglass Universe
6:05 The Interface Dilema
14:55 The Metaculus
16:55 Causality
22:30 Simultaneous Causation
25:50 Theories of Time
44:07 Challenging the Causal Principle
In this second episode, we examine William Lane Craig's deductive version of the moral argument for God, why it fails, and how we can flip it and possibly disprove God. We note how prominent thinkers such as Richard Dawkins, Michael Ruse, and Peter van Inawagen are misquoted to support the moral argument and how it ignores thousands of years of discussion in philosophy.
Koons paper is here: https://faculty.georgetown.edu/koonsj/papers/Euthyphro.pdf
A timeline is below:
0:00 preview
0:16 introduction
1:31 The moral argument against God
6:48 PhilPapers survey
11:05 moral compass
22:39 misquoting Dawkins
23:35 Jesus gets it wrong
33:49 Euthyro dilemma
41:33 Animals
52:23 misquoting Michael Ruse
54:09 moral theories
1:01:40 Neither objective nor subjective ?
1:03:53 Swiburn'es criqitue of the moral argument
1:12:48 misquoting Van Inwagen
Timeline:
0:00 Introduction
0:59 Dark energy
1:57 The DESI instrument
3:47 New results
8:36 I wasn't expecting that
11:26 The Hubble tension
14:16 the fate of the universe
16:08 The future is coming soon
We aim to discuss science and philosophy and how they intersect in the philosophy of religion.
In this, our first episode, we reply to comments made by William Lane Craig on Alex or Connor's show Within Reason. Particularly his claims regarding Richard Dawkins, fine-tuning, the Caannatie genocide, and divine command theory.
A timeline is below:
0:00 preview
0:15 introduction
2:32 Fine-tuning
16:21 Problem of evil
27:24 The Canaanites
38:25 Was it genocide?
51:50 Divine Command Theory
A timeline is here:
0:00 Introduction
0:43 Nociceptors
1:49 analgesic seeking
4:24 anxiety
4:57 neophobia
5:49 fear contagion
6:47 fish memories
7:30 fish brain FMRI
8:09 A gene for pain
8:43 fish personalities
9:44 self awareness test
11:07 replying to skeptics
11:57 Proving Self awareness without a cortex
14:10 a rare brain damaged patient
17:36 where is pain in the brain?
19:51 leucotomy
21:13 Affective Neuroscience
22:48 convergent evolution
23:41 pain is ancient
24:26 conclusion
Simon White, Emeritus Director at the Max-Planck Institute for Astrophysics and
Stacy McGaugh, Professor of Astronomy, Case Western Reserve University
For our other hosted debates see here: youtube.com/watch?v=AUyylR5RPZw&list=PLJ4zAUPI-qqoZl9JuEiLHjVDLkQQ6Y4KB
for Stacy's blog, see here:
tritonstation.com
A timeline of the film is below.
0:00 Introduction
1:56 Simon's story
4:03 Stacy's story
6:30 Evidence for dark matter
21:09 Stacy case for MOND
30:40 "I agree with Stacy"
41:12 The Lampost effect
52:00 dark matter sub halos
1:00:35 missing satellites
1:14:00 bullet cluster
1:22:40 CMB
1:30:00 Are both theories right?
1:41:04 wide binaries and Gaia
1:45:30 other problems for LCDM
1:50:42 Sociology of science
1:57:15 Looking to the future
However, one of the researchers mentioned in the article, Ivan Agullo, argues the story is totally misconceived, and the evidence is consistent with a Bounce. In this film, he explains why.
For more on LQC see here:
youtube.com/watch?v=x9jYH5VIF9E&t=1740s
and here
youtube.com/watch?v=MgwJmWXoWWI&t=66s
For our Before the Big Bang series:
youtube.com/watch?v=Ry_pILPr7B8&list=PLJ4zAUPI-qqqj2D8eSk7yoa4hnojoCR4m
A timeline of the film is below.
0:00 Introduction
1:15 Ivan vs Scientific American
5:04 LQC and the Big Bounce
7:53 Seeing the Bounce in the CMB
11:06 CMB anomalies
12:03 Are the Bang and the Bounce compatible?
17:09 What were they looking for?
19:44 No Signal, what does it mean?
23:20 Oscillations
24:12 CMB anomalies and the bounce
27:02 Final Thoughts
The film can be found. here: youtube.com/watch?v=aM3y7AviNU8&t=1224s
For my YouTube channel
youtube.com @skydivephil
and Twitter
twitter.com/skydivephil
The film has 3 sections:
Section 1
We meet the authors of this paper and others who explain the EPAS (The Expanded Problem of Animal Suffering).
Sections 2
We review various theistic replies to animal suffering and show how atheists, agnostics and other religious skeptics reply.
Section 3
We discuss claims made by leading Christian thinkers like CS Lewis, Michael Murray, Richard Swinburne, and William Lane Craig that neuroscience implies we should downplay animal suffering. This is something we tackled many years ago, but since then, a rare patient who had key cortical regions knocked out enables us to do a direct experimental test of the claims of these theologians. Namely testing his pain perception. The results were published in a paper in Philosophical Psychology, and the authors of that paper are in this video explaining why these findings are devastating for the one explanation that might undermine the Expanded Problem of Animal Suffering.
This film stars the authors of both of these papers, including lead author Phil Halper (aka skydivephil), philosopher of consciousness Ken Williford, neuroscientist David Rudrauf, pain expert Perry Fuchs, as well ethicists Peter Singer and Mark Bernstein, and philosopher Joe Schmid and Within Reason host Alex O'Connor (the artist formerly known as cosmic skeptic).
A timeline of the film is below.
0:00 Introduction
1:16 The problem of time
1:55 The problem of creation
3:00 The problem of divine commands
4:15 The problem of divine actions
7:53 The problem of the Anthropocene
8:42 Answering theists' replies introduction
8:48 Nomic regularity
11:33 Soul making
14:02 Justified genocide?
16:23 After-life compensation
18:29 A Pre-Adamic Fall
20:39 Skeptical Theism
25:32 Other arguments
26:07 The Expanded Problem vs. Theists replies
28:17 Do animals suffer? Neocartesianism
28:51 CS Lewis on Animal Pain
29:35 William Lane Craig's infamous quote
31:21 Replying to Craig and Lewis
32:10 Self Awareness
32:52 Three bogus levels of pain
33:01 What is pain affect?
33:28 The Pre-frontal cortex
33:50 The importance of Patient R
35:59 The most critical experiment in theology
38:12 Where does the brain generate pain?
38:51: Sub-cortical regions and the distribution of pain in animals
44:07 The anterior cingulate cortex, another mistake by Theologians
45:14 A justification for Neocarteisanism?
45:50 Convergent evolution
46:52 Lobotomy and Craig's contradiction
49:10 Summing up and reversing Craig's argument
This clip is taken from our longer film on the subject, showing a skeptical take on the fine tuning of the universe for life. Featuring Roger Penrose, Carlo Rovelli, Sean Carroll, Alan Guth and many other leading experts. We cover problems of probability, the multiverse, cosmological natural selection and related issues that potentially debunk the fine tuning argument.
You can see that film here:
youtube.com/watch?v=jJ-fj3lqJ6M&t=1462s
a reply to this argument can be found here:
youtube.com/watch?v=QJYWkqOzUQ0&t=4036s
and our counter reply here:
youtube.com/watch?v=zNH-ZgSpBuQ
With thanks to Chris (morn1415) for the fabulous images.
0:00 Introduction
0:46 Penrose Hawking
2:50 Roger Penrose
4:18 Past eternal Inflation?
6:18 Tricked by coordinates
7:27 De Sitter Space
9:07 Beyond the BGV
10:42 An ambiguity in the BGV
11:48 Many things are possible
14:00 Viability of the Bounce
14:56 Beyond Einstein
16: 28 Cuscuton Bounce
18:28 G bounce
19:54 Emergent Universe
21:39 What does it mean?
youtube.com/watch?v=jJ-fj3lqJ6M&t=1221s
for a reply from the proponents of the argument see here:
youtube.com/watch?v=QJYWkqOzUQ0&t=4036s
and for our counter reply see here:
youtube.com/watch?v=zNH-ZgSpBuQ&t=2319s
0:00 Introduction
0:58 Structures in the universe
5:04 what is S8?
6:07 measuring S8
7:08 It doesnt match
10:11 comparison with the Hubble tension
12:12 Cosmological constant
13:30 early dark energy
15:04 causal set quantum gravity
17:02 string theory to the rescue?
20:16 The Euclid Satellite
0:00 Introduction
0:45 NIayesh's story
1:15 Beth's story
2:25 relativity
3:26 Gott & Li model
6:23 origins of the PTC model
8:17 PTC periodic time cosmology
10:55 Penrose cyclic model
13:01 Sir Roger Penrose
14:19 CCC and PTC
15:45 conformal rescaling and the CMB
17:28 assumptions
18:41 why a time loop?
20:11 empirical test
23:96 predcitions
26:19 inflation vs PTC
30:22 gravitational waves
31:40 cycles and the 2nd law
32:54 paradoxes
34:08 causality
35:17 immortality in a cyclic universe
38:02 eternal return
39:21 quantum gravity
39:57 conclusion
Elizabeth Gould has asked to make this clarification in the written text " "Despite the availability of infinite time in the periodic time model, this doesn't lead to thermalization in a typical time-evolution scenario, and therefore doesn't, strictly speaking, solve the problem related to thermalization in the power spectrum. The reason for this is that, unlike bounce models with a net expansion each cycle, our model has an effective contraction during the conformal phases. Periodic time, therefore, has a unique character in which it reuses the power spectrum from the previous cycles, which is confined to a given form due to the constraints of the system, rather than removing the old power spectrum and needing to produce a new one."
Subsequently astrophysicist Luke Barnes and philosopher Philip Goff offered their criticism of our criticism. Here we have assembled some of our original talking heads to review their criticism and offer a reply, defending the original position that fine tuning argument for God does not work.
Our original film can be found here: youtube.com/watch?v=jJ-fj3lqJ6M
Luke Barnes and Philip Goff’s reply is here: youtube.com/watch?v=QJYWkqOzUQ0&t=4036s
and we also recommend this video on Bayes theorem on the Majesty of Reason Channel: youtube.com/watch?v=o1MdtyLL3Uw&t=4423s
Our panel consists of Graham Priest , Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at The Graduate Center, City University of New York, well known for his work in logic especially non classical logic, the philosophy of mathematics and science and Buddhist philosophy.
Barry Loewer, who is the distinguished professor of philosophy at Rutgers University and director of the Rutgers Center for Philosophy and the Sciences. Barry specialises in philosophy of science and philosophical logic and the foundations of quantum mechanics, statical mechanics and probability .
Dan Linford who is one of the rising stars in the intersection of the philosophy of physics and philosophy of religion. He did his Phd in philosophy, under Paul Draper and had well known atheist cosmologist Sean Carroll and theistic fine tuning advocate Rob Collins on his thesis committee. He’s now doing a postdoc at the University of Nebraska and recently authored the book Existential Inertia and Classical Theistic Proofs with Joe Schmidt.
Niayesh Afshordi who is an astrophysicist and cosmologist , he’s Professor at the University fo Waterloo and faculty at the Permitter Institute for Theoretical physics. Niayesh won the silver medal at the world physics Olympiad as a teenager, won 1st prize the The Buchalter Cosmology Prize and works in a variety of fields from early universe cosmology, black holes, dark energy and quantum gravity
OUTLINE
0:00 Intro
3:26 Dan’s opening thoughts
6:43 Graham opening thoughts
11:23 Niayesh opening thoughts
13:33 Barry opening thoughts
20:51Bias
28:53 Changing the constants
40:21 Bayes theorem
41:36 Objective Bayesianism
51:13 Principle of Indifference
58:27 Infinities
1:00:00 Infinity again
1:06:00 Gob vs God
1:15:08 Probability of life given God
1:20:11 Does god need to fine tune?
1:24:10 Boltzmann Brains
1:32:57 Entropy
1:39:54 Cosmic Darwin
(We define God as a perfect Omni immaterial mind as for example modern Christians and Muslims advocate, there are other conceptions of God which our video does not address).
Just to be clear, this is a polemical film arguing against the fine tuning argument.
Timecodes
0:00 Introduction
4:11 The universe as a roll of the dice
6:15 what is probability?
7:28 probability problems
9:25 measure problem
15:45 deceptive probabilities
20:23 the flatness problem
22:14 counterfactuals versus probabilities
23:59 fine tuning versus God
37:02 necessity
38:53 multiverse and anthropics
47:34 Boltzmann brains
49:45 Entropy
52:45 Cosmological Natural Selection
59:10 conclusion
Our first assembled many leading physicists and philosophers to offer what they think is wrong with the argument.
It clearly got the attention of William Lane Craig as he made a four part series responding.
In this film we reply to his reply. There are yet agin many leading experts here including Sean Carroll, Carlo Rovelli, Niayesh Afshordi, Adrain Moore, Alex Malpass and others.
We also made a 6 hour long response video with Dan Linford ( who also appears in this film ), James Fodor and Digital Gnosis . Find that here: youtube.com/watch?v=txG_iVmtgpo&t=4480s
All opinions expressed are those of the person expressing them and should be taken as a collective opinion. Nevertheless, we sent this to everyone involved to make sure no one objected to it. None did.
Timecodes
0:00 Introduction
3:10 metaphysical absurdity
6:27 infinite subtraction
11:25 infinite future
14:27 Potential infinity
17:25 angels, God and infinity
18:49 infinite countdown
21:32 Grim Reaper Paradox
23:28 Absence of Evidence
23:49 Big Bang Singularity
26:46 Quantum Gravity
27:23 Hartle Hawking Model
29:37 BGV Theorem
32:25 Quantum Eternity Theorem
34:00 Cherry Picking
36:00 Collapsing Universe
40:46 Reversing the arrow of time
41:46 entropy
42:50 Wall theorem
44:27 singularities again
45:19 Neo Lorentzianism
54:10 models with a beginning
55:47 causality and QM
1:02:00 causes and cats
1:04:33 metaphysical principle
1:06:19 simultaneous causation
1:07:48 time travel
1:08:40 free agent
1:12:47 desperate atheists
1:14:35 summing up
Cast:
Adrian Moore
Graham Priest,
Wes Morriston
Alex Malpass
Daniel Linford
Sean Carroll
Niayesh Afshordi
Carlo Rovelli
Barry Lower
Chris Hitchock
Susanne Schander
Abhay Ashtekar
Arif Ahmed
Aurelien Barrau
Alistair Wilson
Alan Guth
Alex Vilenkin
Simon Saunders
Timecodes
0:00 Introduction
1:38 Actual versus Potential Infinity
2:40 Cantor's Infinity
3:06 The Infinite Property
5:42 Hilbert’s Hotel
11:16 Contradiction & not a Contradiction
13:38 Jupiter and Saturn
14:52 Physicists on Infinity
16:38 Counting to Infinity
18:36 The Infinite Future
22:35 Spacetime Singularity
24:50 Carlo Rovelli on Neo Lorentzian Relativity and Cosmic Time
28:29 Hawking, Penrose, Vilenkin, Efstathiou on The Big Bang & Quantum Gravity
29:37 Strings, Loops and the Big Bounce
31:16 Guth and Vilenkin on the BGV
34:00 Is a Collapsing Universe Unstable?
35:31 Wall Theorem, Ashtekar and Afshordi
36:36 Anthony Aguirre on Past Eternal Universe
37:47 Singularities, Magueijo and Vidotto
38:24 Second Law, Guth and Ashtekar
40:43 A Universe From Nothing? Vilenkin
42:53 Causality
44:17 Interpretations of QM
48:05 Tigers in Our Living Room, Vilenkin
49:44 Causality and Philosophy
51:25 Simultaneous Causation
54:46 Can The Universe Create Itself?
56:51 Ghazali's Argument
57:53 Closing Arguments