Consciousness

[untermensche]

However you want to dress up your "no". You are right.

And if we use writing out all the fractions as a model for infinite time it could not have been completed before any present moment.

It is impossible for infinite time to have completed before any present moment.

Only a finite amount of time could have completed.

No, all that does is show that you're using a bad model for infinite time.

You are assuming that time in the past has to have the same order type as an enumeration. Enumerations have a minimum element, so using that model is assuming your conclusion. You are begging the question.

I am assuming if there is time in the past something could possibly happen in it.

And if you claim the time could be infinite that is exactly like saying you could write out all the fractions between zero and one in it.

It is impossible.

You offer no way it could be possible.

Talking about imaginary infinities that can never be expressed is not going to help.

 

[beero1000]

However you want to dress up your "no". You are right.

And if we use writing out all the fractions as a model for infinite time it could not have been completed before any present moment.

It is impossible for infinite time to have completed before any present moment.

Only a finite amount of time could have completed.

No, all that does is show that you're using a bad model for infinite time.

You are assuming that time in the past has to have the same order type as an enumeration. Enumerations have a minimum element, so using that model is assuming your conclusion. You are begging the question.

I am assuming if there is time in the past something could possibly happen in it.

And if you claim the time could be infinite that is exactly like saying you could write out all the fractions between zero and one in it.

It is impossible.

You offer no way it could be possible.

Talking about imaginary infinities that can never be expressed is not going to help.

Sigh. It would really help if you understood what I said before responding to it.

Do you see why you are begging the question? Arguing from incredulity immediately afterward is not going help either, no matter how confident you are in the assertion.

 

[untermensche]

You have nothing but evasion after evasion.

You will address nothing.

You are claiming infinite time is something that could be completed.

We know for certain that for a present moment to occur all the time before it must have completed.

Prove an infinite amount of time could have completed. That is the positive claim here.

I don't have to do anything for the rational assumption to be it could not.

 

[bilby]

You have nothing but evasion after evasion.

You will address nothing.

THIS HERE is Psychological projection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection Please learn what it is, and STOP DOING IT.

You are claiming infinite time is something that could be completed.

We know for certain that for a present moment to occur all the time before it must have completed.

Prove an infinite amount of time could have completed. That is the positive claim here.

If time has no beginning, then infinite time has ALWAYS completed, at any defined point in time. ONLY if we assume your conclusion - that there is a beginning - does your reasoning hold true. You are begging the question.

I don't have to do anything for the rational assumption to be it could not.

Assumption is not rational. What you (or anyone) thinks should be true is not a guide to the truth.

 

[untermensche]

If time has no beginning, then infinite time has ALWAYS completed

I know the ridiculous claim. You have to prove it is possible at any time to say it has always been possible.

What I am looking for is an explanation for how an infinity could ever be completed.

Can you complete writing out all the fractions between zero and one?

Can it ALWAYS have been completed?

I am waiting for the first person putting forth this positive claim that a real infinity could be completed to prove it.

I've heard the claim many many times.

I have not heard one word on how it could be possible.

 

[bilby]

If time has no beginning, then infinite time has ALWAYS completed

I know the ridiculous claim.

What I am looking for is an explanation for how an infinity could ever be completed.

If time has no beginning, how could it NOT?

Can you complete writing out all the fractions between zero and one?

Can you show how this activity is in any way analogous to time without beginning?

Can it ALWAYS have been completed?

Sure, if it always was.

I am waiting for the first person putting forth this positive claim that a real infinity could be completed to prove it.

I've heard the claim many many times.

I have not heard one word on how it could be possible.

You mean, you don't like it, and refuse to understand it, however many times it is shown to you that it is possible - and inevitable - if we start from the assumption that time has no beginning.

Unless you can show that time without beginning is impossible, there is no further proof needed.

Assume (ad argumentum) time without beginning. There is no contradiction implied by this assumption; Therefore it is possible. Your pet "argument" that 'infinite moments cannot have passed' is simply a false statement under the initial assumption - at any point in time, infinite moments have (by definition) passed. You can "resolve" this only by begging the question, and assuming the existence of a beginning.

 

[Treedbear]

What is impossible is for it to not have a beginning.

Why is that impossible? You keep making this assertion, but you still haven't argued for it.

I can't see how you can frame an argument for it not being a possibility. Of course, if it were true that it were impossible, rather than merely hard to imagine, then sure, there would be a finite number of days, but I can't see how you could prove it to be the case that it is.

I think it comes down to the assumption that one day or one minute, etc. has some inherent meaning. It's a matter of perspective. If one assumes the universe had a beginning then the time it currently takes for the Earth to go through one rotation is representative of some definite fraction of existence. If time had no beginning and is unbounded then a day loses all meaning except with regard to us humans. It would only have an intrinsic quality based our conceptual understanding. So we kind of lose our significance in the grand scheme of things. Historically this perspective tends to lead to a more scientifically objective understanding. It seems to be a form of Zeno's Dichotomy Paradox, in which you can never move from point A to point B because you are continually moving half the remaining distance. The irrationality lies in the notion that half distances have some inherent meaning rather than merely conceptual. The same with the notion of the existence of a yesterday. Without that the argument has no basis.

 

[untermensche]

If time has no beginning, how could it NOT?..

You are trying to prove it is possible for time to have no beginning. That's what proving it is possible for a real infinity to complete means.

Assuming it is possible is to do nothing. It is pure confusion.

Prove it is possible.

Can you complete writing out all the fractions between zero and one?

Can you show how this activity is in any way analogous to time without beginning?

It shows how completing any real infinity is impossible.

 

[untermensche]

If time had no beginning....

My position is this is an impossibility.

And for anyone making the positive claim it is possible I am waiting for one argument to demonstrate it is.

 

[bilby]

You are trying to prove it is possible for time to have no beginning.

I am not trying; I actually did it.

That's what proving it is possible for a real infinity to complete means.

Anything is possible, unless you can show that it entails a contradiction.

Assuming it is possible is to do nothing. It is pure confusion.

It is the starting point for assisting possibility. Assume X is possible - Examine the resulting implications for contradictions - If none can be found, then X is possible.

It's not a difficult technique, although there are some traps for the unwary. Mere possibility is a low bar - a great many things are possible, and an infinite past is one of them, and will remain so until someone shows that assuming an infinite past entails a contradiction.

Prove it is possible.

Unless you can show that time without beginning is impossible, there is no further proof needed.

Assume (ad argumentum) time without beginning. There is no contradiction implied by this assumption; Therefore it is possible. Your pet "argument" that 'infinite moments cannot have passed' is simply a false statement under the initial assumption - at any point in time, infinite moments have (by definition) passed. You can "resolve" this only by begging the question, and assuming the existence of a beginning.

Can you show how this activity is in any way analogous to time without beginning?

It shows how completing any real infinity is impossible.

It shows how completing a very specific infinity is impossible, in finite time. It is therefore not analogous to an infinite past, which necessarily has NO beginning, and is by definition NOT finite time.

It's a shit analogy, and you need to stop using it.

 

[untermensche]

Anything is possible, unless you can show that it entails a contradiction.

Is it possible to write out all the fractions between zero and one? They all "exist" don't they?

There is no contradiction.

There is just an understanding of whether it is possible or impossible.

 

[bilby]

Anything is possible, unless you can show that it entails a contradiction.

Is it possible to write out all the fractions between zero and one?

Yes. It will require infinite time though.

They all "exist" don't they?

There is no contradiction.

Indeed there is not. So yes, it is possible.

If, instead of your question "Is it possible to write out all the fractions between zero and one?" we asked "Is it possible to write out all the fractions between zero and one in a finite amount of time?" then (given that the time taken to write out a fraction is greater than zero) there would be a contradiction, and the answer would then be 'no'.

There is just an understanding of whether it is possible or impossible.

It would appear that you have not got that understanding at all. "Impossible" is synonymous with "entails a contradiction".

 

[Treedbear]

If time had no beginning....

My position is this is an impossibility.

And for anyone making the positive claim it is possible I am waiting for one argument to demonstrate it is.

If you don't mind:

...
I think it comes down to the assumption that one day or one minute, etc. has some inherent meaning. It's a matter of perspective. If one assumes the universe had a beginning then the time it currently takes for the Earth to go through one rotation is representative of some definite fraction of existence. If time had no beginning and is unbounded then a day loses all meaning except with regard to us humans. It would only have an intrinsic quality based our conceptual understanding. So we kind of lose our significance in the grand scheme of things. Historically this perspective tends to lead to a more scientifically objective understanding. It seems to be a form of Zeno's Dichotomy Paradox, in which you can never move from point A to point B because you are continually moving half the remaining distance. The irrationality lies in the notion that half distances have some inherent meaning rather than merely conceptual. The same with the notion of the existence of a yesterday. Without that the argument has no basis.

It's well beyond my ability to prove the universe had no beginning, with or without boundary. My point was that I've seen no good argument that it can't be true. So I leave open that possibility. But Zeno offers nothing but a reductio absurdum. Your argument that infinite time cannot exist is posited on the existence of an infinity of fractional numbers.

 

[untermensche]

Your argument that infinite time cannot exist is posited on the existence of an infinity of fractional numbers.

1/10, 1/100, 1/1000, 1/10,000...

Is it possible to write out every member of this series?

Time is real. It is not imaginary.

If time passed then it actually happened.

Is it possible for an infinite amount of time to have already happened?

That can be answered.

 

[Treedbear]

Your argument that infinite time cannot exist is posited on the existence of an infinity of fractional numbers.

1/10, 1/100, 1/1000, 1/10,000...

Is it possible to write out every member of this series?

It is irrelevant to the question.

Time is real. It is not imaginary.

If time passed then it actually happened.

Is it possible for an infinite amount of time to have already happened?

That can be answered.

And I've already admitted that I don't have the answer to whether it's possible.

 

[untermensche]

And I've already admitted that I don't have the answer to whether it's possible.

You're half way there.

If you can understand that saying infinite time occurred before some moment is the same as saying all the fractions between zero and one were written out before that moment, you know.

 

[fromderinside]

Is that all fractions where convergence process from one to zero is not to be found in the foreseeable future. Interesting how adding time to the problem extends the number for fractions radically. Or does it? Actually one can find as many fractions between one and zero as there are numbers which I believe is without bound.

 

[Kharakov]

"and that's the way it is ... This is Walter Cronkite reporting"

There was a joke on a news aggregator I used to frequent. Whenever someone said something completely obvious, they'd say "Ric Romero reporting". I still don't get the reference, and don't want to Google it.

- - - Updated - - -

I’m happy that there could be nothing before something and that the existence of time comes with the e

wut

 

[Kharakov]

And I've already admitted that I don't have the answer to whether it's possible.

You're half way there.

If you can understand that saying infinite time occurred before some moment is the same as saying all the fractions between zero and one were written out before that moment, you know.

Writing hasn't existed for eternity, so that's not possible.

 

[DBT]

It is not an ad hom.

It is an exaggeration. A rhetorical device.

Again I did not just say some idea was bad.

I gave an alternative idea to show it.

You have no point.

You are trying to redefine the term.

Remarks directed at the person rather than the point of contention itself is by definition an ad hom - which literally means ''to the person''

How do you talk to anybody unless you engage their person?

You simply address what the person is saying, points raised, problems expressed, without referring to the condition of the person, ie, ignorant, knowing nothing, etc....which is the definition of an ad hom....