I only read the last 2 posts, but as I've posted before, after my 3-4 acid trips 40 years ago, I wrote 2000 pages about higher dimensions, answering every conundrum in physics and philosophy. The answer to your question: Existence is relative to something else. The 3-D universe did not exist, in that, there was nothing physical (3-D) yet. Time (the 4th dimension) didn't exist. But the highest dimension (you want to call it God?) did. Something from the higher dimensions lost its symmetry spin and exploded into lower dimensions, creating them. That explains how time might not have always existed in the physical universe. Give me a cupcake now.
I'm going to ignore the problems in your use of the words "proven" and "finite" and stress once again this simple point: if time didn't exist before the universe, there never was a time at which the universe did not exist. Thus, there would be no point at which "nothing" turned into "something". Asking why the Big Bang didn't happen earlier is just another meaningless question. What does "earlier" mean in timelessness? Statements about change, conservation, and time only make sense once a clock is ticking.
You're still left with space/time/matter coming into existence from previous non-existence. Someone wound the clock, no?
Ok, since these sort of words are apparently not powerful enough to convey this sort of topic, what shift took place 13.7 billion years ago? What brought that into being?
Also give me one example where mindless chaos brings forth order, complexity, information and interworking systems anywhere in the known universe. Obviously without presupposing the universe in the process. Is it observed anywhere?
"Shift" and "brought into being" both imply change. Change requires time. Without time neither of these are meaningful. You are throwing around words like "timeless" without seeming to understand the consequences of that statement.
Trying to think of an analogy, it's like a electrocardiogram heart monitor flat-lining from eternity to eternity, but somehow there is a heartbeat inbetween. It makes no sense to me.
I don't see how this is helping your cause, you just keep pushing the question back a step. So did nothing of significance happen roughly 14 billion years ago according to most modern science?
Uh yeah. You presupposed it's happened therefore it must have happened, circular. Tell me why it's believeable.
I don't have a cause, aside from explaining why your argument isn't compelling to me. Obviously something has to be "eternal" (meaning that it has existed for all of time), right? You've chosen an invisible, sentient being. I choose the universe itself. The only difference between your mystery and mine, at the moment, is that you believe you can have a conversation with yours.
So the universe created itself from nothing? Apparently we are just on polar opposites here. I don't see a scenario where than can be possible, but apparently you do. You've given me no reason to accept your argument as compelling. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree
