@Joe Nation,
Where do you get such "proven" conclusion??
I don't see a real life evidence.
The crowd of science whizzes hasn't come to any conclusions either. The universe appears to be expanding at an accelerating rate, from which we can deduce the very early universe was small, dense, and very hot. It is hard to tell if such a phenomenon is the beginning or just point of transition. Currently, it is impossible to tell.
"Speculating, rationally or otherwise, upon the unknown falls to philosophy, not science." -Raithere
Until your speculation falls in the science category, Joe, I'll still doubt and question/ not believe your argument.
As you can see the pattern, it is almost impossible to prove a material creation that is infinite, at least not yet....
Is the Universe eternal?
I say not yet. (It's a joke
)
Your theory can not be "proven" currently, and you are trying to make it sound logical, well that's all anyone can do with the lack of evidence.
Ultimately, Joe, from my thought analysis there is no philosophical choice but a self existing first cause that was uncaused. This is philosophically and logically acceptable. All other options diminish philosophical logic and you end up with a recursive argument.Tautology really, or circular reasoning that gets us nowhere.
This (self existing first cause that was uncaused) may be an unsatisfactory outcome for some but it is the only outcome of the philosophical logic, avoiding recursion.
While taking a quantum physics class (some years ago), when asked the professor if the universe is eternal, he suggested that opposite, that the universe is finite. Because he explained, physics can't explain a practical model to explain an eternal/infinite universe.