# How can one evaluate the plausibility of an eternal object?

Suppose I told you one of two things.

A) A Boeing 747 arose by chance in a scrapyard within a 24 hour period after a tornado flew through it.

B) A Boeing 747 always existed.

Suppose I then told you that one of them happened, and you have to decide which occurred. Think of any other complex object if this analogy doesn’t work, since the plane is not the point of the example.

How can or should one evaluate the plausibility of these two alternatives? On the one hand, the notion of something very complex arising by chance within a small duration of time seems utterly implausible. But more importantly, it can be defined to be utterly improbable.

In the other case, it is hard to make sense of what probability would mean here. Usually, it makes sense in the context of things beginning to exist, not things always existing. Thus, it may be fair to say that a complex, yet eternal, object has an undefined probability.

Should this undefined probability act as a plus or a minus when comparing it to the case of the object arising by chance?

• Does this answer your question? Can we assign probabilities to God and is the argument from improbability from Dawkins valid? Commented Oct 31, 2023 at 19:03
• If an infinite indestructible un-deformable airplane exists (however you want to define exists-now in the context of very far away and in the region of a gravitational event horizon), it helped form one of the universe's first black holes around 14 billion years ago, and isn't sitting on a very recent structure like a scrapyard, or a planet. Maybe every galaxy has a magic indestructible 747 at the center...
– g s
Commented Nov 3, 2023 at 14:22
• Why are you giving only two alternatives? How about building up from simpler parts (or evolving)? Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 23:36
• >...plus or a minus...? - Try 0! 🤑😘 Commented Jan 4 at 13:18