Limited energy in the universe and God

[Opinionated]

I stumbled upon a website today(A Practical Man's Proof of God) that describes to the "Practical Man" that a god must exsist. I found this interesting, as an athiest, because I had thought that there being a god is completely impossible (not to say I have changed my mind). I go to it thinking that they would have some easily-proved-false information, but was confused on this statement:

A third scientific proof that the atheist is wrong is seen in the second law of thermodynamics. In any closed system, things tend to become disordered. If an automobile is driven for years and years without repair, for example, it will become so disordered that it would not run any more. Getting old is simple conformity to the second law of thermodynamics. In space, things also get old. Astronomers refer to the aging process as heat death. If the cosmos is "everything that ever was or is or ever will be," as Dr. Carl Sagan is so fond of saying, nothing could be added to it to improve its order or repair it. Even a universe that expands and collapses and expands again forever would die because it would lose light and heat each time it expanded and rebounded.

 

Is there any theory that mentions how energy in the universe stays in the universe? Please help. :cup:

[TeleMad]

The problem with the quote's reasoning is that it ignores the fact that the second law of thermodynamics allows for localized pockets of increasing order, so long as they are offset by greater decreases in order elsewhere. It is the total entropy (disorder) of the universe as a whole that must increase, not entropy everywhere within the universe.

[pgrmdave]

I think part of the problem is that it assumes that the universe could lose light and heat. These things must stay in the universe simply because there is no where else to go.

[sanctus]

And I'm not 100% that you apply the second law of thermodynamics to the whole universe... (just take into account a multiverse theory for example)

[motherengine]

the problem with this reasoning is that it is based on the assumption that god can be measured by science or that belief can be justified by science which is missing the whole point about coming to god as a child with faith and not some guy in a lab coat with a microscope and a pair of tweezers.