What does modern physics say about uncaused effects

AI Thread Summary
Modern physics raises questions about "uncaused" effects, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics, where events like quantum fluctuations and radioactive decay appear to occur without identifiable causes. The traditional Cosmological argument posits that all effects must have causes, leading to the idea of a singular uncaused cause, but this is challenged by the notion that self-created events could exist independently of any prior conditions. Discussions highlight the philosophical implications of events that seemingly arise from "nothing," suggesting that if such occurrences are possible, they may happen with infinite frequency, potentially undermining the concept of causality. However, the inability to definitively identify uncaused events raises skepticism, as any observed phenomenon could still be linked to unknown causes. Ultimately, the dialogue emphasizes the intersection of physics and philosophy in understanding the nature of existence and causation.
  • #51
sd01g said:
If one claims that an event (or anything else) can come from or originate from literally nothing (as opposed to apparently nothing) and presents no real evidence that it can happen and refuses to even speculate on How it might happen, then faith, dogma, or sophistry are the only ways to support that claim.

What's the evidence for an infinite chain of cause-and-effect preceding the BB?

Just because one side of question appears dogmatic, it doesn't mean the other isn't.
 
Back
Top