Infinite Past

[beero1000]

You can have infinite points within a finite space if they have NO dimension. In other words IF they are imaginary. Time is not imaginary.

Geeze. You don't understand that anything 0 length, like the present, is a point that doesn't have any length. There are an infinite amount of presents in the past, and the future.

You can infinitely many non-overlapping line segments of positive length in a finite space. Achimedes know that 2200 years ago.

 

[Bronzeage]

The past does not end at the present moment. The past begins at the present moment.

All the moments in the past are finished (ended) at the present moment.

Where they began is the question.

Are there more negative numbers than positive numbers?

 

[bilby]

All the moments in the past are finished (ended) at the present moment.

Where they began is the question.

Are there more negative numbers than positive numbers?

Positive numbers are infinite because they never end. Negative numbers must be finite, because it would be ridiculous to suggest that they are infinite, as that would imply that they never begin, so they don't exist. Apparently.

 

[ryan]

A huge problem here, you are forgetting that infinite infinitesimal moments only = a finite moment and nothing more (assuming countably infinite), in math and thus probably in our physical reality if there are physical continuums. Finite moments of equal length will equal infinity.

You can have infinite points within a finite space if they have NO dimension.

In other words IF they are imaginary.

Time is not imaginary.

But it would require 0 dimensional points to make up 1 dimension. So 4 dimensions require a 0 dimension to exist, no? beero1000, does this sound right?

 

[Bronzeage]

Are there more negative numbers than positive numbers?

Positive numbers are infinite because they never end. Negative numbers must be finite, because it would be ridiculous to suggest that they are infinite, as that would imply that they never begin, so they don't exist. Apparently.

I suppose the real question should be, does future time exist? We expect it to be there, but have no way of knowing it will be.

 

[beero1000]

You can have infinite points within a finite space if they have NO dimension.

In other words IF they are imaginary.

Time is not imaginary.

But it would require 0 dimensional points to make up 1 dimension. So 4 dimensions require a 0 dimension to exist, no? beero1000, does this sound right?

I don't know what that means.

 

[bilby]

Positive numbers are infinite because they never end. Negative numbers must be finite, because it would be ridiculous to suggest that they are infinite, as that would imply that they never begin, so they don't exist. Apparently.

I suppose the real question should be, does future time exist? We expect it to be there, but have no way of knowing it will be.

I don't think that's an unreasonable assump

 

[ryan]

Untermenshe is right that Bob, walking a finite speed, will never reach infinite, and thus could not be at his "infinitieth" step in the present if he were only walking a finite amount of time from the negatives.

You won't ever reach the "end of the naturals", there isn't one. It's like you'll never find the smallest finite unit of time- there isn't one.

Traveling from 1 to 2 on the number line requires one to traverse an infinite amount of points.

Between location A and different location B in spacetime, there are an infinite amount of locations (spacetime is smooth/continuous). There is 10% of the distance from A to B, 1% of the distance, .1% of the distance, .01% of the distance......

If you take a finite step, you have traversed an infinite amount of locations in spacetime- every single location between the start of and end of your step has been traversed.

Likewise from one moment in time to the next- there are always an infinite amount of moments in any finite amount of time.

Mathematically, there really is an end to the naturals; larger infinite sets require it. 2^(aleph 0) is supposedly larger. But let's assume the general notion of infinity of being endless.

Endlessness seems to presuppose finite measurements in an endless distance. Okay, but what logical contradiction disallows Bob to move at n lengths per 0 seconds? Forget logical requirements, in theory, from the frame of reference of light, light travels from one end of the universe to the other in 0 time. Bob could be the name for light.

So Bob would get to the last element of the natural numbers that would put him on the right side of them.

 

[ryan]

But it would require 0 dimensional points to make up 1 dimension. So 4 dimensions require a 0 dimension to exist, no? beero1000, does this sound right?

I don't know what that means.

Each number that makes up the number line would be of 0 dimension, right? All these 0 dimensional numbers would make up the one dimesional real number line, no?

 

[ryan]

Positive numbers are infinite because they never end. Negative numbers must be finite, because it would be ridiculous to suggest that they are infinite, as that would imply that they never begin, so they don't exist. Apparently.

I suppose the real question should be, does future time exist? We expect it to be there, but have no way of knowing it will be.

QM is currently stuck in a position that the future doesn't exist, only present and past.

 

[untermensche]

All the moments in the past are finished (ended) at the present moment.

Where they began is the question.

Are there more negative numbers than positive numbers?

Both are the same amount. They are endless.

But that is a point on a number line, not reality. It is imaginary.

In reality if the past is infinite that means at any given moment infinite moments have already passed.

But infinite moments never finishes passing. It can't have already passed.

 

[bilby]

Are there more negative numbers than positive numbers?

Both are the same amount. They are endless.

But that is a point on a number line, not reality. It is imaginary.

In reality if the past is infinite that means at any given moment infinite moments have already passed.

But infinite moments never finishes passing. It can't have already passed.

It can if there has been an infinite amount of time.

Once again, your objection assumes you conclusion - infinite moments never finishes passing in a finite time. It can't have already passed if the past is finite. You are begging the question.

 

[untermensche]

Both are the same amount. They are endless.

But that is a point on a number line, not reality. It is imaginary.

In reality if the past is infinite that means at any given moment infinite moments have already passed.

But infinite moments never finishes passing. It can't have already passed.

It can if there has been an infinite amount of time.

Once again, your objection assumes you conclusion - infinite moments never finishes passing in a finite time. It can't have already passed if the past is finite. You are begging the question.

If the future is infinite it will never finish. Infinite time never finishes passing. It can't have already happened.

 

[Random Person]

Infinity is a mathematical concept but not a physical one.

For instance if you were to create a set of whole numbers that could be divided by one then you could say the set would contain an infinite set of numbers.

In the physical world we can't measure an infinite amount of anything,

 

[untermensche]

Infinity is a mathematical concept but not a physical one.

For instance if you were to create a set of whole numbers that could be divided by one then you could say the set would contain an infinite set of numbers.

In the physical world we can't measure an infinite amount of anything,

But even if you apply it you have to apply it rationally and consistently.

Theoretically infinite time is equivalent to the future if the universe never ends. It is time without end.

Any other infinity of time can also be described as time without end. Here infinity = infinity.

Saying time without beginning is just another way of saying time without end.

There is no difference between the two.

 

[ryan]

It can if there has been an infinite amount of time.

Once again, your objection assumes you conclusion - infinite moments never finishes passing in a finite time. It can't have already passed if the past is finite. You are begging the question.

If the future is infinite it will never finish. Infinite time never finishes passing. It can't have already happened.

The photon will theoretically pass through an infinite amount of space in a finite amount of time; or similarly, it will pass through a finite amount of space in 0 time.

You have to consider more information regarding the thought experiment.

 

[ryan]

Infinity is a mathematical concept but not a physical one.

For instance if you were to create a set of whole numbers that could be divided by one then you could say the set would contain an infinite set of numbers.

In the physical world we can't measure an infinite amount of anything,

But even if you apply it you have to apply it rationally and consistently.

Theoretically infinite time is equivalent to the future if the universe never ends. It is time without end.

Again, you are leaving out valuable information. Infinite for what/whom and in what circumstances?

The universe could have somehow emerged with us beginning infinitely far into the future. Or what if I went into black hole where time from my frame of reference would change infinitely fast.

 

[bilby]

It can if there has been an infinite amount of time.

Once again, your objection assumes you conclusion - infinite moments never finishes passing in a finite time. It can't have already passed if the past is finite. You are begging the question.

If the future is infinite it will never finish. Infinite time never finishes passing. It can't have already happened.

It can, if it has had infinite time in which to do so. Once again, your objection assumes you conclusion - Infinite time never finishes passing if it started passing a finite time ago. You are STILL begging the question.

 

[Kharakov]

Geeze. You don't understand that anything 0 length, like the present, is a point that doesn't have any length. There are an infinite amount of presents in the past, and the future.

You can infinitely many non-overlapping line segments of positive length in a finite space. Achimedes know that 2200 years ago.

Wow, so he knew the Mandelbrot set?

 

[Kharakov]

Are there more negative numbers than positive numbers?

Yeah, because bills and fines are negative positive numbers.