Infinte Regress Timeline...

[untermensche]

There is no evidence that an infinite amount of time has already occurred in the past.

Correct. And there is no evidence that it hasn't. We don't know. However, in either case, the universe would look exactly like it looks now.

The evidence is the big bang and that is evidence of a finite amount of time in the past.

It is hilarious that you think anyone who does not agree with you about this asinine assertion is an idiot, just as you thought anyone was an idiot who didn't agree with you that time could be counted like grains of sand for the many, many pages that you made that "argument".

An amount of time can be counted just like we can count grains of sand. But my comparison of time with a grain of sand was just to say that both are real. So while I can't say that all real things have the same properties they all share the property of being a thing that can be perceived in some way. But this was all part of the argument to try to demonstrate that the amount of any real things must be a finite sum. It has nothing to do with this simple contradiction of saying an infinite amount of time has already occurred in the past.

 

[skepticalbip]

Correct. And there is no evidence that it hasn't. We don't know. However, in either case, the universe would look exactly like it looks now.

The evidence is the big bang and that is evidence of a finite amount of time in the past.

It is considered to be "evidence" for a start of time for those who believe it is. However, for those who don't, it is just a significant event along an infinite timeline. As I said, we don't know. Many cosmologists would have agreed with you fifty years ago but today most cosmologists wouldn't.... We don't know.

 

[Kharakov]

Here's a whole segment of Krauss talking about time. And I misquoted him. He said time may have begun in the big bang. He sees a start to time as corresponding to known physics.

At about 18:50 he's asked if there is a beginning to time. He also says that time may not have existed before the big bang. He does not assume time in the past is infinite.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

A quote from the preface of Krauss's book "A Universe From Nothing"

Similarly, our minds may not be able to easily comprehend infinities (although mathematics, a product of our minds, deals with them rather nicely), but that doesn’t tell us that infinities don’t exist. Our universe could be infinite in spatial or temporal extent. Or, as Richard Feynman once put it, the laws of physics could be like an infinitely layered onion, with new laws becoming operational as we probe new scales. We simply don’t know!

I just noticed skepticalbip's statement "We don't know" which is reflected in Krauss's statement (italics are Krauss's). Ohh, the preface to that book is on Amazon here under a couple reviews (one by NDTyson).

Krauss would probably say that my logical argument may be logical but the universe doesn't care about human logic. And that may be true. But the contradiction is still a contradiction.

I still don't see the contradiction. If time has always existed, any point in time has an infinite amount of time before it. If time did not begin, there isn't a cutoff point in the past.

If time did begin, only a finite amount of time has passed.

So the only thing you have to argue is that time began. Don't mention infinite time- there are 2 varieties: time that began, and time that always existed.

If time existed for 10 years, greater than 10 years ago time did not exist. If time existed 100000000 years, over that many years ago time did not exist. If time existed forever, there is not point, ever, at which time did not exist.

 

[untermensche]

The evidence is the big bang and that is evidence of a finite amount of time in the past.

It is considered to be "evidence" for a start of time for those who believe it is. However, for those who don't, it is just a significant event along an infinite timeline. As I said, we don't know. Many cosmologists would have agreed with you fifty years ago but today most cosmologists wouldn't.... We don't know.

There is no evidence that time existed before the big bang. There are some speculations and incomplete models but not a shred of evidence.

Why would we think it is there without any evidence? What other things should we think exist before the big bang without evidence?

 

[Mageth]

What part of "We do not know" do you not understand, untermensche?

 

[untermensche]

What part of "We do not know" do you not understand, untermensche?

What part of complete lack of evidence don't you?

How do we say something exists when there is absolutely no evidence it does?

 

[skepticalbip]

It is considered to be "evidence" for a start of time for those who believe it is. However, for those who don't, it is just a significant event along an infinite timeline. As I said, we don't know. Many cosmologists would have agreed with you fifty years ago but today most cosmologists wouldn't.... We don't know.

There is no evidence that time existed before the big bang. There are some speculations and incomplete models but not a shred of evidence.

Why would we think it is there without any evidence? What other things should we think exist before the big bang without evidence?

This is the classical logical fallacy of argument from ignorance. I asked you to look it up a few times - but apparently you haven't, or didn't understand it.

I'll try to explain it to you.
Assume a case where there are only two possible answers (in this case, either time had a beginning or is infinite) but neither are known to be true. It is a logical fallacy to argue that the fact that one can not be proven means that the other is true.

You are just stating your belief that time begin with the initial inflation without any evidence other than your belief that was the start of time. Now, try proving that time started with the initial inflation and all you can do is state your belief that it is so.

There are others who argue just as avidly as you are arguing that time begin something like six thousand years ago because that is their belief. Their "proving" that it is so is also limited to just stating their belief that it is so.

I even ran into one person who believes that the calendar tells us when time begin. So today, time would have begun two thousand thirteen years, eight months, and fouteen days ago.

 

[ryan]

I still don't see the contradiction. If time has always existed, any point in time has an infinite amount of time before it. If time did not begin, there isn't a cutoff point in the past.

Here's how untermensche got me to drink the Kool-Aid. Can an infinite number of years pass after, say, today, yes or no? If yes, then when will this happen? The answer is never. So how could have an infinite number of units of time have already passed? Our time should never have come.

Skepticalbip, you are welcome to answer too.

 

[Juma]

I still don't see the contradiction. If time has always existed, any point in time has an infinite amount of time before it. If time did not begin, there isn't a cutoff point in the past.

Here's how untermensche got me to drink the Kool-Aid. Can an infinite number of years pass after, say, today, yes or no? If yes, then when will this happen? The answer is never. So how could have an infinite number of units of time have already passed? Our time should never have come.

Skepticalbip, you are welcome to answer too.

This is the same question:
If the universe are infinite, how come we are at this point?

 

[Mageth]

What part of "We do not know" do you not understand, untermensche?

What part of complete lack of evidence don't you?

How do we say something exists when there is absolutely no evidence it does?

"We do not know" does not say something exists, untermensche.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's how untermensche got me to drink the Kool-Aid. Can an infinite number of years pass after, say, today, yes or no? If yes, then when will this happen? The answer is never. So how could have an infinite number of units of time have already passed? Our time should never have come.

Skepticalbip, you are welcome to answer too.

This is the same question:
If the universe are infinite, how come we are at this point?

Where else would we be???

 

[Juma]

What part of complete lack of evidence don't you?

How do we say something exists when there is absolutely no evidence it does?

"We do not know" does not say something exists, untermensche.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's how untermensche got me to drink the Kool-Aid. Can an infinite number of years pass after, say, today, yes or no? If yes, then when will this happen? The answer is never. So how could have an infinite number of units of time have already passed? Our time should never have come.

Skepticalbip, you are welcome to answer too.

This is the same question:
If the universe are infinite, how come we are at this point?

Where else would we be???

When else would we be?

 

[ryan]

Here's how untermensche got me to drink the Kool-Aid. Can an infinite number of years pass after, say, today, yes or no? If yes, then when will this happen? The answer is never. So how could have an infinite number of units of time have already passed? Our time should never have come.

Skepticalbip, you are welcome to answer too.

This is the same question:
If the universe are infinite, how come we are at this point?

Yes, it is the same point.

The question "can time regress infinitely?" is essentially saying, "can time that will never pass pass?" Not even autocorrect agrees! The question is self-contradictory, incoherent, meaningless, etc.

 

[Mageth]

"We do not know" does not say something exists, untermensche.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's how untermensche got me to drink the Kool-Aid. Can an infinite number of years pass after, say, today, yes or no? If yes, then when will this happen? The answer is never. So how could have an infinite number of units of time have already passed? Our time should never have come.

Skepticalbip, you are welcome to answer too.

This is the same question:
If the universe are infinite, how come we are at this point?

Where else would we be???

When else would we be?

Yes. We are at this location at this time ("NOW"). That's true no matter what the answer to the question of time is.

 

[untermensche]

There is no evidence that time existed before the big bang. There are some speculations and incomplete models but not a shred of evidence.

Why would we think it is there without any evidence? What other things should we think exist before the big bang without evidence?

This is the classical logical fallacy of argument from ignorance. I asked you to look it up a few times - but apparently you haven't, or didn't understand it.

I am not saying infinite time having already occurred in the past is a contradiction because we are ignorant.

It is a contradiction because two ideas are in contradiction with one another.

It is a contradiction to say that the amount of time that occurred in the past is infinite.

Infinite time goes on and on without end.

This is tedious but, if time without end must occur before yesterday, or any day, occurs than that day will never occur.

How is it logical to say that before yesterday time without end occurred? It just shows a lack of understanding of what the term "without end" means.

 

[skepticalbip]

I still don't see the contradiction. If time has always existed, any point in time has an infinite amount of time before it. If time did not begin, there isn't a cutoff point in the past.

Here's how untermensche got me to drink the Kool-Aid. Can an infinite number of years pass after, say, today, yes or no? If yes, then when will this happen? The answer is never. So how could have an infinite number of units of time have already passed? Our time should never have come.

Skepticalbip, you are welcome to answer too.

Visualize an infinite timeline. Now select any point on that timeline. Time will have existed infinitely into the past and extends infinitely into the future from that point. Now, how many hours have passed along that timeline from the past to your point? Obviously an infinite number of hours.

Given an infinite time (the infinite timeline) for an event (our now) to occur, an infinite amount of time will have passed before that event. An infinite amount of time passes in an infinite time. Unter-'s "argument" is simply the same misunderstanding of the nature of infinities that Zeno had.

 

[untermensche]

What part of complete lack of evidence don't you?

How do we say something exists when there is absolutely no evidence it does?

"We do not know" does not say something exists, untermensche.

We do know it is illogical to say that infinite time has already occurred in the past.

We do know that there is no evidence of time existing before the big bang.

We DO know some things.

 

[untermensche]

Visualize an infinite timeline. Now select any point on that timeline. Time will have existed infinitely into the past and extends infinitely into the future from that point. Now, how many hours have passed along that timeline from the past to your point? Obviously an infinite number of hours.

Given an infinite time (the infinite timeline) for an event (our now) to occur, an infinite amount of time will have passed before that event. An infinite amount of time passes in an infinite time. Unter-'s "argument" is simply the same misunderstanding of the nature of infinities that Zeno had.

This is pure nonsense.

You start with the impossible and work to the ridiculous.

 

[Mageth]

This is the classical logical fallacy of argument from ignorance. I asked you to look it up a few times - but apparently you haven't, or didn't understand it.

I am not saying infinite time having already occurred in the past is a contradiction because we are ignorant.

It is a contradiction because two ideas are in contradiction with one another.

It is a contradiction to say that the amount of time that occurred in the past is infinite.

Infinite time goes on and on without end.

Yes, and time goes forward, and the leading edge of time is NOW. We are, of course, at NOW. In 10 minutes, we will be at NOW. It will always be NOW even if there was no beginning to time.

This is tedious but, if time without end must occur before yesterday, or any day, occurs than that day will never occur.

How is it logical to say that before yesterday time without end occurred?

Why are you trying to go backwards? Time goes forwards.

It just shows a lack of understanding of what the term "without end" means.

You are confusing yourself by trying to look backwards in time for a beginning. Time has an "end" or terminus at its leading edge, that we refer to as NOW. This is true whether or not there is a terminus in the other direction.

- - - Updated - - -

"We do not know" does not say something exists, untermensche.

We do know it is illogical to say that infinite time has already occurred in the past.

No we don't. You assert it.

We do know that there is no evidence of time existing before the big bang.

So? We still do not know that time did not exist before the big bang.

We DO know some things.

Just not anything that you can establish.

 

[untermensche]

We do know it is illogical to say that infinite time has already occurred in the past.

No we don't. You assert it.

I demonstrate it.

If infinite time must occur before we experience some moment in time then we will never experience that moment in time.

Please explain to me how the time that occurred before yesterday had no end. And do it without assuming it.

If you say "I don't know" then you admit the logic is sound.

 

[skepticalbip]

Visualize an infinite timeline. Now select any point on that timeline. Time will have existed infinitely into the past and extends infinitely into the future from that point. Now, how many hours have passed along that timeline from the past to your point? Obviously an infinite number of hours.

Given an infinite time (the infinite timeline) for an event (our now) to occur, an infinite amount of time will have passed before that event. An infinite amount of time passes in an infinite time. Unter-'s "argument" is simply the same misunderstanding of the nature of infinities that Zeno had.

This is pure nonsense.

You start with the impossible and work to the ridiculous.