1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou may be an expert at "the subtleties of language" but it still takes infinity to count to infinity or down from infinity whether there is a requirement to get started or not.
Your 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.
Case still open.
1 edit
Originally posted by sonshipAnd there is an infinity of time to do it in, so no problem there.
You may be an expert at "the subtleties of language" but it still takes infinity to count to infinity or down from infinity whether there is a requirement to get started or not.
The trick in your argument rests on imagining a beginning, then making two claims:
1. That the from the beginning to now is an infinite amount of time.
2. That the amount of time available to get through this infinite amount of time is finite.
I'm just trying to explain it and its already not making sense before I even throw in a few criticisms.
Sorry, case still open.
There is an infinite past and an infinite future, what changes is the matter that fills the void. In the same respect there is an infinite largeness to space, when you get to the furthest point imaginable there is still something past it and an infinite smallness... quarks are also made of something. We are only limited by our technology not what is real.
Originally posted by sonshipIf you start counting at 1 and count from 1 to 2 in one second, then from 2 to 3 in 1/2 second, from 3 to 4 in 1/4 second, and so forth (1/8, 1/16, etc.), you will have counted every positive integer there is, in two seconds.
You may be an expert at "the subtleties of language" but it still takes infinity to count to infinity or down from infinity whether there is a requirement to get started or not.
Originally posted by JS357Sounds like a flawed theory to me, sort of like, the theory of evilution. 😏
If you start counting at 1 and count from 1 to 2 in one second, then from 2 to 3 in 1/2 second, from 3 to 4 in 1/4 second, and so forth (1/8, 1/16, etc.), you will have counted every positive integer there is, in two seconds.
2 edits
Originally posted by JS357Even in Calculus, when calculating the area under a curve, the limits must be set. Only God has no limits for He sets the limits on the universe. We are only able to examine it within those limits. 😏
It's simple mathematics. It must seem vaguely threatening to you.
P.S. Theory and reality do not always match.
Originally posted by RJHindsso why compare it to your term evilution.
Even in Calculus, when calculating the area under a curve, the limits must be set. Only God has no limits for He sets the limits on the universe. We are only able to examine it within those limits. 😏
P.S. Theory and reality do not always match.
-Removed-We are talking about theories and the latest is that space and time did not start with our big bang but was only one of many going on in an infinite universe, only a small bit of which is represented by our particular universe. One line of evidence is the 'axis of evil', a pattern seen by the latest CMB space probe that seems to indicate our universe was actually bumped into by another at one time or other during the big bang. So the idea that time began during the big bang may only mean the starting of only a local clock, with trillions of others banging around out there.
Originally posted by sonhousePerhaps this theory does not match reality either. 😏
We are talking about theories and the latest is that space and time did not start with our big bang but was only one of many going on in an infinite universe, only a small bit of which is represented by our particular universe. One line of evidence is the 'axis of evil', a pattern seen by the latest CMB space probe that seems to indicate our universe was ac ...[text shortened]... ly mean the starting of only a local clock, with trillions of others banging around out there.