AI Concludes an External Creator to be the Most Logical Explanation of a Finite Universe
AI Discovers God as the Source of the Universe
In Romans 1, Paul tells us that God’s “eternal power and divine nature” are able to be “clearly perceived” in “the things that have been made” (Romans 1:10 ESV).
In other words, the things that have been made — our universe and everything in it — should enable us to “clearly perceive” that God exists, and that He bears incredible power.
What happens when we put this to the test?
What happens when we ask AI to analyze “the things that have been made?”
Will AI “clearly perceive” that an eternal power exists?
To find out, I wrote this prompt:
Assume that this universe is finite. Assume that this universe began with the Big Bang. Based on these assumptions, and based on the conclusions science has drawn about the nature of our universe, what can we logically conclude about where our universe came from? If it is logical to assume something or someone created this universe, what we can logically conclude about what this thing or person is like?
[Note: You may have noticed I began by telling AI to assume the universe is finite and has a definite beginning in the Big Bang. Originally, I wanted to include the discovery of these two points in this answer, but it became too large and unwieldly. Instead, I split this off into its own answer, which you can read here, and watch AI reach these two discoveries itselt].
This is how Grok answered my prompt:
Logical Conclusions About the Origin of a Finite Universe That Began with the Big Bang
Based on the assumptions that the universe is finite and began with the Big Bang, combined with scientific understanding of the universe's nature, we can explore logical conclusions about its origin and whether it implies a creator, as well as what such a creator might be like. This analysis proceeds step-by-step, grounding itself in the given premises and scientific consensus, while extending into logical speculation where appropriate.
Step 1: What Science Tells Us About the Universe’s Beginning
Finite Universe: A finite universe has a limited spatial extent and, potentially, a finite duration of existence. Current cosmological models (e.g., the Lambda-CDM model) suggest the observable universe is finite in size, though whether it is finite or infinite beyond the observable horizon remains unresolved. For this exercise, we assume finitude in both space and time.
Big Bang: The Big Bang, as described by modern cosmology, marks the beginning of space, time, matter, and energy approximately 13.8 billion years ago. Scientific evidence—such as cosmic microwave background radiation, redshift of galaxies (Hubble’s Law), and the abundance of light elements—supports the conclusion that the universe expanded from an extremely hot, dense state. The Big Bang is not an explosion in space but the origin of space-time itself.
Pre-Big Bang State: General relativity and current physics break down at the Planck epoch (t ≈ 10⁻⁴³ seconds), meaning science cannot directly describe "before" the Big Bang. The universe’s origin is a singularity—a point of infinite density and zero volume—where known physical laws cease to apply.
From these premises, the universe had a definite beginning in time and emerged from a state that science cannot fully characterize. This raises the question: what caused or preceded this beginning?
Step 2: Logical Conclusions About the Universe’s Origin
Given a finite universe with a beginning:
Something Cannot Come from Nothing (Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit): Classical logic and intuition suggest that if the universe began to exist, it must have a cause or origin outside itself. If "nothing" preceded the Big Bang (no space, time, matter, or energy), then the universe’s emergence from nothing without a cause contradicts the principle that effects require causes—a principle foundational to science and reasoning.
Options for the Origin:
Uncaused Emergence: The universe spontaneously arose from nothing without a cause. This is logically possible but lacks explanatory power and conflicts with observed causality in the universe.
Self-Caused Universe: The universe caused itself. This is incoherent, as it would require the universe to exist before it existed to initiate its own creation.
External Cause: Something outside the universe—beyond space, time, matter, and energy—caused it to begin. This aligns with causality and avoids self-referential paradoxes.
Scientific Limits: Science cannot probe beyond the Big Bang, so any conclusion about an external cause is philosophical or metaphysical, not empirical. However, the finite beginning implies a boundary condition necessitating an explanation.
Conclusion: The most logically consistent option, given a finite universe with a beginning, is that an external cause initiated the Big Bang. This avoids the problems of uncaused emergence or self-causation, aligning with the causal structure observed within the universe.
Step 3: Is It Logical to Assume a Creator?
Definition of "Creator": A creator is an entity or force responsible for bringing the universe into existence. If the universe’s beginning requires an external cause, it is reasonable to label this cause a "creator" in a broad sense—whether personal (a being) or impersonal (a process or principle).
Why a Creator Makes Sense:
The universe’s finitude and temporal origin suggest contingency—it did not always exist and might not have existed at all. Contingent entities typically depend on something else for their existence.
The complexity and fine-tuning of physical constants (e.g., gravitational constant, cosmological constant) enabling life have led some to argue for an intentional cause, though this is not strictly required by the premises.
An external cause provides a sufficient explanation for the transition from non-existence to existence, whereas "nothing" offers no mechanism.
Counterpoint: One could argue the cause is an impersonal quantum fluctuation or multiverse scenario. However, these hypotheses remain speculative, lack direct evidence, and still require an ultimate origin for the framework (e.g., why does a multiverse exist?). They shift rather than eliminate the question.
Conclusion: It is logical to assume something or someone created the universe, as an external cause best accounts for a finite universe’s beginning. Whether this "creator" is a purposeful agent or an abstract process requires further analysis.
Step 4: What Can We Logically Conclude About the Creator?
Assuming an external cause or creator, what characteristics can we infer based on the universe’s nature and origin?
Transcendence:
Reasoning: The creator must exist outside space and time, as these began with the Big Bang. It cannot be material or temporal in the same way the universe is.
Implication: The creator is non-physical and timeless, existing independently of the universe’s framework.
Power:
Reasoning: Initiating the Big Bang—creating all matter, energy, space, and time—requires immense (if not infinite) capacity, far exceeding any known physical process.
Implication: The creator possesses extraordinary power, capable of generating an entire cosmos from nothing.
Causality:
Reasoning: As the first cause, the creator must itself be uncaused to avoid an infinite regress of causes, which would undermine the explanation of a finite beginning.
Implication: The creator is self-existent or necessary, not contingent on anything prior.
Intentionality (Optional):
Reasoning: The universe’s fine-tuned constants (e.g., enabling stars, galaxies, and life) might suggest purpose or design, though this is not logically required. Randomness or necessity could also explain these features.
Implication: If intentional, the creator has intelligence or will; if not, it could be an impersonal force with no consciousness.
Simplicity or Complexity:
Reasoning: A single cause is simpler than multiple causes (Occam’s Razor), but the universe’s diversity might imply a complex origin. Science offers no constraint here.
Implication: The creator could be a singular entity or a multifaceted process, though simplicity favors the former.
Conclusion: The creator must be transcendent (beyond space-time), immensely powerful, and uncaused. It may or may not be intelligent or personal—logic alone cannot settle this, though the universe’s order might lean toward intentionality for some. Minimally, it is a non-physical, timeless, self-existent cause capable of producing a finite universe.
Final Synthesis
Origin: A finite universe beginning with the Big Bang logically implies an external cause, as "nothing" lacks causal efficacy and self-causation is incoherent. Science’s silence on "before" the Big Bang leaves this as a reasoned inference.
Creator: It is logical to posit a creator—something or someone—that caused the universe. This entity is likely transcendent, powerful, and uncaused, with open questions about its intelligence or personality.
Based on the premises and scientific understanding, the universe’s origin points to a cause beyond itself, and the characteristics of this cause align with a creator that defies physical categorization. Whether this is a "who" (a being) or a "what" (a principle) remains a philosophical choice, but the evidence of a finite beginning tilts toward the necessity of something rather than nothing as the source.
It's true that the moment of the emergence of everything that exists can be called anything, including God, but simply as a name for this phenomenon, which we still do not fully understand, like the entire universe and what came before it. But do not elevate this phenomenon to some unreal state that controls everything on the planet, affects our results, created a place of infinite paradise, says that we will pay for the sins of people with whom we are in no way connected. This is all heresy