Is there Uncaused Cause?

[Seremonia]

IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TWO POLES

+++ Cosmological Argument +++

This argument may have perfected the argument that you know is: “because of the infinite backward search is not possible, then it will end to the earliest of Something” (cosmological argument), where I made perfection by abolishing the reasons relied on “the consequences of infinity”, and by looking at what happens if the idea of ​​infinity in this argument is sustained, then observe the consequences.

A Causal Chain

New creation asserts a causal chain: If there is a new creation, therefore we can trace backward to previous cause

—– Your Objection: There is no evidence for new creation, just conservation of energy.

The Law of Conservation of Energy: Related to your objection, new creation is new conversion from one form of energy to another form energy and from the current form of energy we can trace back to something that has ability to make a new appearance of new form of energy. And if this tracing is ended at one thing, which is energy itself, this huge energy must be considered as the first cause or if we disagree with it then we must accept there is possibility to trace back to the source of energy that doesn’t relate to the law of conservation energy.

And this energy as the first cause must be considered as the uncaused conscious energy, and if we disagree with it then we have to accept that human (that has consciousness) is not coming from energy (this open new perspective as a causal chain that has no relation with your objection). —–

Infinite Backward

Infinite backward asserts new creation: If an infinite backward asserts there is no creation then there will be an ended point as an uncaused cause, therefore we try another assertion to assert the consequences

—– Your objection: no logical support for infinite backward causality.

Infinite backward can be considered as our trial to push our logical to the farthest extent and see where is it going to? To make us clear that any possibilities thinking on something (even the impossible one) always assert finite backward causality. And eventually forcing any kind of thinking will lead us to conclusion to finite causality. That’s one point. The second point: your statement asserts there is finite backward causality. —–

Opposite Direction of Causal Chain

Infinite backward asserts a causal chain: If infinite backward asserts new creation, then there is a causal chain at forward direction closer to current

The Intersection of The Two Opposite Directions of The Causal Chain

Backward direction and forward direction of causal chain are ended at the uncaused cause: The two points close together assert consequences that each of the two points must be an uncaused cause or both of the two points as uncaused causes, therefore for the last consequence if there is no one as a cause for the other then it asserts there is a creation that exist from nowhere which is an uncaused cause itself.

SYLLOGISM

1. New creation (new form or new function) asserts a causal chain
   
2. Infinite backward asserts new creation (new form or new function)
   

- Therefore, infinite backward asserts a causal chain, and further, backward direction and forward direction of causal chain are ended at the uncaused cause

FIXED EXISTENCE

• Axiom: Something (without additional assertions) can’t transcend beyond something itself
  

- From one liter water (without additional assertions) can’t be poured as much as 1 gallon water. Meaning: All existences (without additional assertions) can not transcend beyond all existences (their self)

All Existences are Fixed (or aren’t fixed)

If the number of all existences are not fixed, then, the number of all existences (without additional assertions) transcend beyond all existences (their self). It against axiom.

• Therefore: The number of all existences are fixed. It asserts there is finite regression. IOW, there is an uncause caused (there is only finite backward), OR …

• All existences are fixed, in the sense that from all things there won’t be possibilities beyond what can be provided by all things itself. If there is infinite regression then there will be possibilities that can’t be provided by all things. It asserts that at least there is possibilities that is coming from nothingness which is impossible. Otherwise, it (possibility) came from “not nothingness” which means it came from all things itself. It asserts, there is no infinite regression.
  

• But, if all things are infinite regression itself, then we can refer to the first argument (IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TWO POLES).
  

+++ Can infinity go backwards on a timeline, and if so, how/why? +++

The Consequence of Infinite Backward

• We have to agree that causality has to stop somewhere, it’s not because we think there is missing links and that we should make our own completion behind the infinite to create reasoning by linking it to something to create completion that it could be considered as “makes sense”, as classical understanding, but,
  

• We have to agree that causality has to stop somewhere, because consequences of infinite itself (in any possible ways) insist us to go to the single pointer as “the earliest”.
  

CONCLUSION

There is Uncaused Cause.