Vilenkin in relation to Kalam Cosmological Argument
Ignoramus here. I hope you have the time to answer my questions.
Vilenkin said in his book:
"It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning."
(Vilenkin, Many Worlds in One, 176)
1) What does it exactly mean when he says "cosmic beginning"?
2) What are his arguments the led him to this conclusion?
3) Does this imply that the universe really doesn't exist before the big bang? That the universe really had a beginning?
I've been hearing different models of cosmology and such include Vilenkin's model.
1) Are they just simply hypotheses? Or could they be categorized as a valid scientific theory?
Reading upon his paper "Inﬂationary spacetimes are not past-complete"
1) What exactly is the message of this paper? Does it tell us that the universe need to have a beginning?
2) How credible is this paper? Is it valid hypothesis? Is it a valid scientific theory?
Can somebody please enlighten me on this matter? I am lost.
Thanks and much appreciated.