Well, I’m not sure that what you’re saying follows from my argument. What I’m arguing is that BGV infers a beginning, which I believe it does. Now whether or not it can be extrapolated to the quantum regime is unknown. So since it’s unknown, to say that BGV theorem infers a beginning based on what “is known” is perfectly warranted as far as I can tell. If you want to disagree based on what “isn’t known” that’s OK, but then, as far as I can tell, you’re taking the Platonic view of ideas as primary.
Good point. From what I read it is a deductive proof, so if that’s correct in that sense it is logically confirmed and could fall into objectively confirmed if that definition were to be broadened to include logically confirmed as well as empirical confirmed. Would that be an acceptable move in your opinion?