Infinite Past

[ryan]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

 

[untermensche]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

It takes an understanding of the differences between the imaginary world of numbers and the actual world of time.

Some get lost because they think that what you can do with imaginary entities, like a point with no dimension, you can also do with something real with dimension.

I can have infinite imaginary entities between 2 imaginary points.

That in no way implies that an infinite amount of something with dimension could exist between any two real locations.

 

[bilby]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

There's nothing in the definition of infinity that says it cannot end. If the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end, then the argument is simply wrong.

The set of negative integers ends at zero, and is infinite.

 

[untermensche]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

There's nothing in the definition of infinity that says it cannot end. If the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end, then the argument is simply wrong.

The set of negative integers ends at zero, and is infinite.

No. They begin there.

Both sides of the number line begin at zero and move away from it.

And this is just more of what I was talking about.

People not understanding the difference between an imaginary system and reality.

 

[Shadowy Man]

There's nothing in the definition of infinity that says it cannot end. If the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end, then the argument is simply wrong.

The set of negative integers ends at zero, and is infinite.

No. They begin there.

Both sides of the number line begin at zero and move away from it.

I didn't realize that the numbers are moving.

 

[untermensche]

No. They begin there.

Both sides of the number line begin at zero and move away from it.

I didn't realize that the numbers are moving.

You weren't looking closely.

The value of the negatives is decreasing as you move along the line away from zero.

That does not mean that they somehow end at zero.

They never end. Their value decreases forever.

 

[bilby]

I didn't realize that the numbers are moving.

You weren't looking closely.

The value of the negatives is decreasing as you move along the line away from zero.

That does not mean that they somehow end at zero.

They never end. Their value decreases forever.

OK, if we are allowed to ignore the sign, then the past begins at the present, and decreases indefinitely into the past. Without ever having a logical requirement to finish.

Unless you are going to engage in special pleading, and only ignore the sign for numbers, but not for hours, minutes or seconds.

 

[untermensche]

You weren't looking closely.

The value of the negatives is decreasing as you move along the line away from zero.

That does not mean that they somehow end at zero.

They never end. Their value decreases forever.

OK, if we are allowed to ignore the sign, then the past begins at the present, and decreases indefinitely into the past. Without ever having a logical requirement to finish.

Unless you are going to engage in special pleading, and only ignore the sign for numbers, but not for hours, minutes or seconds.

It is not ignoring the sign.

It is understanding the concept.

The negatives begin at zero and decrease in value infinitely. They are a mirror of the positives.

They do not end at zero. To think that shows how lost you are. They do not and cannot end anywhere.

 

[bilby]

The future can be described as all the time intervals from t=0 (the present), via t=1, t=2, etc... to t=infinity.

The past can be described as all the time intervals from t=0 (the present), via t=-1, t=-2, etc... to t=-infinity

If we can discuss a future time t=5 seconds, or a past time t=-5 seconds, then we can see that the set of future seconds can be mapped one to one onto the set of past seconds.

If the future can be infinite, then so could the past be.

 

[untermensche]

The future can be described as all the time intervals from t=0 (the present), via t=1, t=2, etc... to t=infinity.

The past can be described as all the time intervals from t=0 (the present), via t=-1, t=-2, etc... to t=-infinity

If we can discuss a future time t=5 seconds, or a past time t=-5 seconds, then we can see that the set of future seconds can be mapped one to one onto the set of past seconds.

If the future can be infinite, then so could the past be.

It can be imagined, but it cannot be logically supported as something real.

To support it means showing it is possible, not merely claiming it.

It requires showing how time intervals without end, because that is what an infinite future would be, could have somehow ended at the present moment.

It is a logical contradiction.

Therefore the thing imagined could never have really existed.

 

[beero1000]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

The notion of an 'unending walk' is already begging the question. Every 'walk' from any point in time to the present has a beginning and and end and a finite length. That by itself does not imply that time is bounded. The extra implicit assumption is that you need to start your walk 'all the way at the beginning' which is assuming the conclusion.

Saying that 'an infinite amount have time must have already passed' is meaningless unless you answer the question 'passed from when'?

 

[untermensche]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

The notion of an 'unending walk' is already begging the question. Every 'walk' from any point in time to the present has a beginning and and end and a finite length. That by itself does not imply that time is bounded. The extra implicit assumption is that you need to start your walk 'all the way at the beginning' which is assuming the conclusion.

Saying that 'an infinite amount have time must have already passed' is meaningless unless you answer the question 'passed from when'?

You are missing the point.

It can't have passed from anywhere. It can never pass. Infinite time is time that never finishes passing.

It cannot have finished passing at some present moment.

And at any given moment the past is complete.

Therefore it could not have been infinite.

 

[beero1000]

The notion of an 'unending walk' is already begging the question. Every 'walk' from any point in time to the present has a beginning and and end and a finite length. That by itself does not imply that time is bounded. The extra implicit assumption is that you need to start your walk 'all the way at the beginning' which is assuming the conclusion.

Saying that 'an infinite amount have time must have already passed' is meaningless unless you answer the question 'passed from when'?

You are missing the point.

It can't have passed from anywhere. It can never pass. Infinite time is time that never finishes passing.

It cannot have finished passing at some present moment.

And at any given moment the past is complete.

Therefore it could not have been infinite.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh, if it wasn't so depressing, this would be comedy gold.

 

[untermensche]

You are missing the point.

It can't have passed from anywhere. It can never pass. Infinite time is time that never finishes passing.

It cannot have finished passing at some present moment.

And at any given moment the past is complete.

Therefore it could not have been infinite.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh, if it wasn't so depressing, this would be comedy gold.

When I see comments like this I know I am dealing with somebody who has no clue about any of this.

Hard to know how to respond to the thoughtful criticism of HAHAHA.

 

[untermensche]

It must be pointed out that claiming the past is finite is just as absurd as claiming it is infinite.

This is a paradox. Showing that infinite time in the past is logically impossible does not mean finite time in the past is logically possible.

Saying time is finite in the past is either saying something came from nothing, a logical absurdity, or time came from something else that came from nothing, just another absurdity.

This paradox cannot be settled either way.

 

[beero1000]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh, if it wasn't so depressing, this would be comedy gold.

When I see comments like this I know I am dealing with somebody who has no clue about any of this.

Hard to know how to respond to the thoughtful criticism of HAHAHA.

As if you've ever actually listened to thoughtful criticism. I responded for ryan, who is actually trying to understand. Your reply just showed you begging the question in exactly the way pointed out in the post you were replying to.

 

[ryan]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

There's nothing in the definition of infinity that says it cannot end. If the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end, then the argument is simply wrong.

The set of negative integers ends at zero, and is infinite.

Yes, infinity seems to be able to end or start at certain references. But if a persons starts down an infinite journey, that seems to be saying that his journey will not end FOR him. It may end for people that observe him from a black hole. But then wait, he did finish even though it was an unfinishable walk?! Damn, I am lost.

 

[ryan]

Nobody is really giving any kind of logical rebuttal to untermenche's argument.

If I have it correct, the argument is that infinity, by definition, does not end. Can a person with the ability to walk infinity do it?

If your answer is yes, then aren't you really saying that an unending walk can end?

Please, I need help because my gut says it can happen, but the logic is too strong for me to go with my gut.

It takes an understanding of the differences between the imaginary world of numbers and the actual world of time.

Some get lost because they think that what you can do with imaginary entities, like a point with no dimension, you can also do with something real with dimension.

I can have infinite imaginary entities between 2 imaginary points.

That in no way implies that an infinite amount of something with dimension could exist between any two real locations.

I think something just clicked.

If we think about time as just another dimension, we can give it the x axis and a spatial dimension on the y axis. So when I think about a guy Bob who tries to walk forever at 1 meter per second, I see that his path will exist simply as a line at a 45 degree angle extending as far as he decides to walk. Let's say Bob is a robot programmed to never stop walking. You may see him at the 500th meter, but because he is programmed to never stop walking, we would know that his walk is never going to end like infinity. I know what you're thinking, but hold on there's more.

If the distance dimension never ends, and the time dimension never ends, then wouldn't his path also never end? This could be interpreted as Bob is walking a never ending walk. He doesn't finish, but the endlessness property of his program is like the endlessness property of infinity.

The distance he will walk does not end. Outside of our frame of reference, these 2 dimensions on a graph don't wait; they are already there infinitely long or they aren't. They will either exist forever along with Bob's path or they won't; both options are instantaneous because nothing is waiting; there is no reference.

Now I am willing to say that from Bob's reference/point of view (or any reference for this matter), he will never finish. But somehow he can finish when there is no reference, like in the case of the whole universe that already exists as 4 dimensions.

Will you agree to that?

 

[abaddon]

Where'd the image of a guy walking an infinitely long line or path come from?

The "journey" isn't made by a person (whatever the person is supposed to be a stand-in for). It's time that makes this "journey", and not on a path or it'd be a case of time trying to keep up with time. Wherever time is is always Right Now, so it has no catching up with infinity to do. Whether time never started and just was always walking, or started its walk, it's always Now.

So where does the notion that anything must traverse an infinitely long line, I guess to get to the "end" of the line (which I guess is the present moment) come from in this discussion?

 

[abaddon]

You are missing the point.

It can't have passed from anywhere. It can never pass. Infinite time is time that never finishes passing.

It cannot have finished passing at some present moment.

And at any given moment the past is complete.

Therefore it could not have been infinite.

Why not? It doesn't have to be "finished" at all. It might be forever moving on, and still its past is complete but its future is not.

Using the line metaphor, here's an infinite past:

<------------0

The 0 being Now.

If you think you have to include the future into this, then here's an infinite past "behind" Now and infinite future "before" now:

<---------0--------->

The forward pointing arrow isn't yet so it is incomplete. But, since we're discussing an infinite past, the imaginary line up to the 0 is complete thus far. Of all those signs, the arrows dashes and 0, the only one representing a "real something" is the 0.

But, again, this is imagining time as a kind of sojourner traversing time. That's the "paradox" (or, rather, befuddlement). That you presented time as a thing that cannot keep up with itself, that cannot "pass" itself.