A synopsis of the article: Atheists believe that nothing made everything, Once an atheist concludes that that is logically impossible, he claims that the universe is eternal. The universe cannot be eternal because of the laws of thermodynamics. god exists, we are morally responsible to him.
Obviously the first thing to address here is the strawman argument in the first sentence.
"When the atheist understands the impossibility of his belief that nothing made everything, he often defaults to the belief that the universe is eternal."
I don't really know of a single atheist that holds the belief that the universe was created from nothing. If one does, it is certainly not a common belief. Why would it be? It's just silly. I think a more accurate opening sentence would be:
"Once I assert that you believe the universe was made from nothing and you correct me, we then move on to discuss the nature of the universe's existence."
Now the meat and potatoes of the bit. The author makes the argument that the universe cannot be eternal because "the laws of thermodynamics cause everything material to run down in time." He then proposes a hypothesis. "Rock + a billion years = dust" I think this argument stems from a lack of understanding regarding the second law of thermodynamics. That law basically says that if the value of entropy in an isolated system is not in equilibrium then that value will increase over time until it hits a maximum value which is at equilibrium. For instance if you swing a pendulum its momentum will decrees until the pendulum stops moving. As the "useful" energy decreases, the entropy of the system increases. Unless of course you push the pendulum again. So a rock in a vacuum is pretty much already in equilibrium. To cause the rock to erode you would need an external force such as moving wind or water or the impact of other rocks.
As for the other part of the argument (The claim that everything material runs down in time) It is somewhat correct. It would be more accurate to say that according to the second law of thermodynamics, regions of concentrated energy will disperse and become "less useful" over time, but we all knew what he meant. So suns will eventually burn out and the entropy of the physical universe will eventually reach a limit at equilibrium. (Baring any unforeseen external influence.) Here is the thing though. It is likely, acording to the general theory of relitivity anyway, that all matter and energy in the universe was contained in a singularity along with all known dimensions before the big bang . It is important to note that the universe did not "start" with the big bang . It is more accurate to think of the big bang as a transition point between two states of the universe . So all energy probably has been moving toward equilibrium since the big bang. (about 13 billion years ago. ) But entropy inside our perceptible dimensions does not really indicate that the universe is finite because it began at the big bang. So there really is not any evidence to indicate that the universe is finite. Its also kind of a misnomer to say that the universe had a beginning because physical time existed only in a singularity up until a certain point and since that is the case the universe existed outside of time. Therefore the universe is eternal. Well, according to the article anyway.
