rationalskepticism.org

murshid wrote:

sturmgewehr wrote:is this true.

The link provided in the video has the full email. Here's a paragraph:

Alexander Vilenkin wrote:I think you represented what I wrote about the BGV theorem in my papers and to you personally very accurately. This is not to say that you represented my views as to what this implies regarding the existence of God. Which is OK, since I have no special expertise to issue such judgements. Whatever it's worth, my view is that the BGV theorem does not say anything about the existence of God one way or the other. In particular, the beginning of the universe could be a natural event, described by quantum cosmology.

He also wrote this in the same email,

Alexander Vilenkin wrote:The question of whether or not the universe had a beginning assumes a classical spacetime, in which the notions of time and causality can be defined. On very small time and length scales, quantum fluctuations in the structure of spacetime could be so large that these classical concepts become totally inapplicable. Then we do not really have a language to describe what is happening, because all our physics concepts are deeply rooted in the concepts of space and time. This is what I mean when I say that we do not even know what the right questions are.

But if the fluctuations are not so wild as to invalidate classical spacetime, the BGV theorem is immune to any possible modifications of Einstein's equations which may be caused by quantum effects.

As I've said elsewhere, I am no expert on this, but it seems to me that what Vilenkin is saying is that we don't know enough to answer the question of whether or not the universe had a beginning. If that's what he is saying then it in no way validates Craig's views on the matter.

Yeah, I know but the problem is now that it is all really confusing, in the last debate with Carroll, he showed Guth saying that the universe is most likely Eternal then on the other hand Vilenkin says that given the available data the Universe most probably had a beginning, I watched the Carroll vs. Craig debate, I think Carroll did great and debunked Craigs argument but in the end all this makes very little sense because I dont know how does the BVG Theorem stand against other Models which describe the Universe as Eternal or something like that, I think Carroll gave this Quantum Eternity Theorem thing which he said was consistent with the data, is it consistent with Inflation?.

Craig accused Carroll that his model violates the second law of TD then Carroll said some more stuff about it and made some other points.