hamsterman: I was going to say something on the subject, but I couldn't find a way to get it in without pushing my main point to the background.
|I am not convinced of #1 due to you only being able to produce a mathematical example of an infinite state system that does not apply to the state of the primordial atom before the big bang (for reasons already listed).|
If #1, then my model is not applicable. I thought that much was obvious.
But if nothing caused, then like I said, that's it. There's no point in asking what caused it, because nothing did. That's where all causal chains end.
|#2 will most likely find itself faced with similar contradictions as faced if we assume infinity for own universe (infinity relative to size and time).|
I'm not sure what you mean. It sounds like I'm still not getting my point across, though.
|When scientist first learned that our universe was larger than the solar system, there may have been theories that the rest of space outisde of our solar system was infinite, but would have been wrong for reasons not only supported by GR but other mathematical implications as well.|
Thus #2 could most likely lead to a finite model
This is such a gigantic leap in logic that you should be ashamed of having typed it.
|that something external which our maths (in all its abstractions may not ever be able to define), so could this something have been caused by somehting we may have to define as devine?|
So this is what it all comes down, huh?
What I'm getting from you is not that a bootstrapping reality can't be derived through logic alone and therefore God exists, but that the derivations contradict the implicit premise that God exists and therefore they're false.