Infinte Regress Timeline...

[untermensche]

So you've already stopped answering questions?

If time didn't end today, did it end today?

Time didn't end today. Prior present moments ended today.

And yes to have a present moment means ALL the prior present moments have finished.

Today all the prior days ended.

If time didn't have a beginning, is there a boundary in the past that one can measure to that is the beginning of time?

If we talk about the duration of time, then if time has no beginning the duration of that time has no end.

That is all we could say about the duration of time that has no beginning.

 

[Juma]

Are you saying that infinity + infinity doesn't equal infinity?

No, i did not.
You talked about "another infinity before the start of the infinitly long past" which is bullocks.

Any length of something that progresses must reach all points before it ends.
There must be a beginning even if it is an infinite number of points away.

If you accept "an infinitely distant beginning of time" then we agree. It is just another way to say "infinite past is possible"

 

[ryan]

No, i did not.
You talked about "another infinity before the start of the infinitly long past" which is bullocks.

Then if I minus infinity from an infinite past, then I will still have infinity left, or I won't have anything left. Do you agree?

Any length of something that progresses must reach all points before it ends.
There must be a beginning even if it is an infinite number of points away.

If you accept "an infinitely distant beginning of time" then we agree. It is just another way to say "infinite past is possible"

 

[bilby]

Then if I minus infinity from an infinite past, then I will still have infinity left, or I won't have anything left. Do you agree?

Why not just divide it by zero?

That makes just as much sense.

Infinity is not a (real) number. You can't work with it as if it was and expect sane or useful results.

 

[Juma]

Then if I minus infinity from an infinite past, then I will still have infinity left, or I won't have anything left. Do you agree?

You cannot subtract infinities using normal subtraction so you must define what you mean by "minus" here.

 

[ryan]

Then if I minus infinity from an infinite past, then I will still have infinity left, or I won't have anything left. Do you agree?

You cannot subtract infinities using normal subtraction so you must define what you mean by "minus" here.

If you minus the natural numbers from the integers, you still have infinity.

- - - Updated - - -

Then if I minus infinity from an infinite past, then I will still have infinity left, or I won't have anything left. Do you agree?

Why not just divide it by zero?

That makes just as much sense.

Infinity is not a (real) number. You can't work with it as if it was and expect sane or useful results.

You may find this interesting, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked...ory/24032/Cardinality-and-transfinite-numbers . Read the 7th paragraph down the page.

 

[Juma]

You cannot subtract infinities using normal subtraction so you must define what you mean by "minus" here.

If you minus the natural numbers from the integers, you still have infinity.
.

For fucks sake: THAT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU MEAN BY "MINUS"!!!!

You seem to want to subtract an infinite set from another infinite set. That can be don in infinitely many ways. You have to provide more information.

 

[ryan]

If you minus the natural numbers from the integers, you still have infinity.
.

For fucks sake: THAT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU MEAN BY "MINUS"!!!!

take away

You seem to want to subtract an infinite set from another infinite set. That can be don in infinitely many ways. You have to provide more information.

I told you in my last post.

 

[untermensche]

X = infinite time

Infinite time = time that never ends, therefore X = time that never ends

Infinite time occurred before the present moment

X occurred before the present moment

Time that never ends occurred before the present moment

 

[bilby]

X = infinite time

Infinite time = time that never ends, therefore X = time that never ends

Infinite time occurred before the present moment

X occurred before the present moment

Time that never ends occurred before the present moment

Is it the definition of infinite that you don't understand; the meaning of the word 'ends'; or the meaning of the '=' symbol?

Because "Infinite time = time that never ends" is utter bollocks when discussing an infinite past, unless you are using at least one of these three terms incorrectly.

An infinite past never starts.
Infinite time may be time that never starts; or time that never ends; or both. If that infinite time is in the past, then it never starts. It just always was. That is what an infinite past MEANS.
'=' does not mean 'might imply under some circumstances'.

There is, by definition, enough time in an infinite past for all of the events that occurred prior to now - even if there were an infinite number of such events.

You don't need to be happy about this for it to be true.

 

[untermensche]

The big lie in this thread is the claim that to say time has no beginning is referring to an amount of time that can possibly finish

Time has no beginning = an amount of time without limit = time that never finishes

There is no finish to the amount of time referred to by saying time has no beginning.

Until this lie is acknowledged progress is hopeless.

 

[bilby]

The big lie in this thread is the claim that to say time has no beginning is referring to an amount of time that can possibly finish

Time has no beginning = an amount of time without limit = time that never finishes

There is no finish to the amount of time referred to by saying time has no beginning.

Until this lie is acknowledged progress is hopeless.

So you are saying that you can't tell the difference between a start and a finish?

Your bookmaker must despise you.

'My horse started first! Pay up, loser!'

I am not sure why you felt the need to inflict this disability on the rest of us for 2,531 posts. But can we please, please, make a start an end to it at this point?

Really, if your argument is that 'without start' means the same thing as 'without end', then you should seek professional help.

 

[Juma]

take away

Take away what? How? There are infinitely many ways to "take away" an infinity from another infinity.

 

[ryan]

take away

Take away what? How? There are infinitely many ways to "take away" an infinity from another infinity.

Why do I have to do everything for you?

Integers minus the naturals: I\N = {..., -3, -2, -1, 0}, is one way.

 

[Juma]

Take away what? How? There are infinitely many ways to "take away" an infinity from another infinity.

Why do I have to do everything for you?

Integers minus the naturals: I\N = {..., -3, -2, -1, 0}, is one way.

My point is that "infinity minus infinity" can result in infinity many different answers and is not a well defined "value". This your original question, which you probably has forgotten by now, now well formulated and thus impossible to answer.

 

[ryan]

Why do I have to do everything for you?

Integers minus the naturals: I\N = {..., -3, -2, -1, 0}, is one way.

My point is that "infinity minus infinity" can result in infinity many different answers and is not a well defined "value". This your original question, which you probably has forgotten by now, now well formulated and thus impossible to answer.

So maybe we have found the reason why infinities in reality must be avoided.

 

[untermensche]

The big lie in this thread is the claim that to say time has no beginning is referring to an amount of time that can possibly finish

Time has no beginning = an amount of time without limit = time that never finishes

There is no finish to the amount of time referred to by saying time has no beginning.

Until this lie is acknowledged progress is hopeless.

So you are saying that you can't tell the difference between a start and a finish?

?????

My post was talking about NO start and NO finish. And it was talking about the AMOUNT of time, not time.

You obviously need a visual aid.



Time is represented by the diagonal lines.

A and B represent the total AMOUNT of of time that has passed.

In this diagram both A and B represent a volume that is increasing without end. An infinite volume.

If the center point is now then an amount of time without end occurs before now. This can be abstracted in a diagram, but conceptually it is impossible for an amount of time without end to occur before now. If it is an amount of time without end it can't occur BEFORE anything. It goes on and on, nothing comes after it because it never ends.

 

[untermensche]

So maybe we have found the reason why infinities in reality must be avoided.

There are many reasons.

If you are doing an experiment and you get a measurement of infinity you know you did something wrong.

 

[bilby]

So you are saying that you can't tell the difference between a start and a finish?

?????

My post was talking about NO start and NO finish. And it was talking about the AMOUNT of time, not time.

You obviously need a visual aid.

View attachment 1335

Time is represented by the diagonal lines.

A and B represent the total AMOUNT of of time that has passed.

In this diagram both A and B represent a volume that is increasing without end. An infinite volume.

If the center point is now then an amount of time without end occurs before now. This can be abstracted in a diagram, but conceptually it is impossible for an amount of time without end to occur before now. If it is an amount of time without end it can't occur BEFORE anything. It goes on and on, nothing comes after it because it never ends.

So you are saying that the only problem with an infinite past is that you find it inconceivable?

What makes you think that your intellectual deficiency in this regard makes a whit of difference to reality?

You are not arguing that an infinite past is logically impossible. You are arguing that thinking about it is hard, so it must be wrong. That is the most pathetic excuse for abandoning reason there is.

 

[ryan]

So you are saying that you can't tell the difference between a start and a finish?

?????

My post was talking about NO start and NO finish. And it was talking about the AMOUNT of time, not time.

You obviously need a visual aid.

View attachment 1335

Time is represented by the diagonal lines.

A and B represent the total AMOUNT of of time that has passed.

In this diagram both A and B represent a volume that is increasing without end. An infinite volume.

If the center point is now then an amount of time without end occurs before now. This can be abstracted in a diagram, but conceptually it is impossible for an amount of time without end to occur before now. If it is an amount of time without end it can't occur BEFORE anything. It goes on and on, nothing comes after it because it never ends.

This is good for everyone to visualise the argument.

But, shouldn't the past be a continuation of the future line, with the shaded part still in between the x axis and the graph?