Originally posted by sonshipYour justification is that 'you can never get started'. Yet the scenario is that there is no start. So there is no requirement to get started.
1.) How long does it take to count from 1 unto infinity ?
Answer: Infinity. You never get to the end.
2.) How long does it take to count DOWN from infinity to 1 ?
Answer: Infinity. You never can get started.
Case closed.
Cheer up twhitehead.
Case still open.
Originally posted by sonship🙄😵
twhitehead wrote:
1. A claim that an infinite past requires 'traversing infinity' which is claimed to be impossible. (though no justification is given).
1.) How long does it take to count from 1 unto infinity ?
Answer: Infinity. You never get to the end.
2.) How long does it take to count DOWN from infinity to 1 ?
Answer: Infinity. You never can get started.
Case closed.
Cheer up twhitehead.
Haven't you ever heard of a supertask?
Originally posted by twhiteheadI see no reasonable justification for any of those 3 claims (and I'm not sure I understand claim 3).
In the thread "Why does something exist instead of nothing?" Thread 15183 it was argued (via youtube video) that time cannot be infinite in the past. The argument seems to be based on:
1. A claim that an infinite past requires 'traversing infinity' which is claimed to be impossible. (though no justification is given).
2. A claim that infi rgument, would it apply to an infinite future? If you are theist, would it apply to heaven?
Claim 1 and 2 seem patently false. I've seen variants of claim 1 in regards to the cosmological argument where the discussion concerns an infinite series of dependent entities, and the claim has no merit. If one considers ANY particular member of such a series and then ANY particular antecedent, there is a FINITE number of links between them, so what is the problem? There is no problem.
Originally posted by LemonJelloClaim 3 was basically if you borrow an ipod from a friend who borrowed it from a friend ad-infinitum then you will never get an ipod. But the only real justification given is that you will run out of people (because there are a finite number of people) or that it takes infinite time (either to make the request, which I say makes the analogy flawed or) which should not be a problem unless you claim that there were no people and no ipods in the infinite past.
(and I'm not sure I understand claim 3).
I think the real trick is that most people realize that in the finite set of people there must have been a first person who owned an ipod in order to lend it. Most people don't realize that in an infinite set this is not necessary.
Time only flows forwards.
Before the big bang is about as relevant as before we entered our mums wombs.
Time-space is here as a blessing and a curse. After the plasma stage where the universe cooled and the other three states of matter were set up, as the conditions for life to evolve, the universe started to fill the galaxies with light, which in turn accelerated our evolutions. To us it seems a mighty long time, but it seems that the universe is eternally patient to lead us to the desired result.
So the past is very long, but not infinite- not in our part of the universe anyway, there may well be other big bangs in other parts of space with extremely different results.
So we are put here, realizing that we don't know how exactly we became the way we are, constantly separating and analyzing our realities. Thing is there is no difference between us and the rest of the universe. Time doesn't exist, per se, it was invented by all of us to give us a chance to understand our true natures. Who we are. Or more precisely what we are.
All the universal archetypes play their role in shaping our universe , they are all important, but without a solid premise to work from we merely go from one speculation to the next without really making any real connections between ourselves and the nature of the universe we inhabit.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by twhiteheadSuppose you are the kind of person that takes 1 second to borrow something, and the person you are borrowing from takes half that time to borrow something, and so on, each person taking half the time to borrow, that the person borrowing from him takes. Then all the borrowing will be done in 2 seconds if there are an unlimited number of borrowings, and you will have the ipod, right? 🙂
Claim 3 was basically if you borrow an ipod from a friend who borrowed it from a friend ad-infinitum then you will never get an ipod. But the only real justification given is that you will run out of people (because there are a finite number of people) or that it takes infinite time (either to make the request, which I say makes the analogy flawed or) whi ...[text shortened]... d in order to lend it. Most people don't realize that in an infinite set this is not necessary.
Originally posted by JS357Excellent point. Although this type of infinity (beginning-less series in finite time) requires that time be infinitely divisible (which is not ruled out by logic either).
Suppose you are the kind of person that takes 1 second to borrow something, and the person you are borrowing from takes half that time to borrow something, and so on, each person taking half the time to borrow, that the person borrowing from him takes. Then all the borrowing will be done in 2 seconds if there are an unlimited number of borrowings, and you will have the ipod, right? 🙂
Originally posted by wolfgang59That was the title of the video, numbnuts. I did not title it.
You didn't watch it did you RJ?
Or do you think that presently not being able to reconcile Relativity and
Quantum Mechanics is proof of god?
P.S. I listed it because it talks about the calculations working out to infinity and that they could not make sense of it.