Infinte Regress Timeline...

[Kharakov]

Apparently...

However, I fail to see how whatever you are saying has anything to do with the argument by you and Unter- that time had to have a beginning because an infinite past would mean that today could never come.

Infinite time just like infinite numbers can have one end, namely the beginning. If time stopped today, we would be at the wrong end. We would be at a boundless bound.

No. Infinite measurements do not have "ends" (or definition). Finite measurements have "ends" (definition).

 

[skepticalbip]

Apparently...

However, I fail to see how whatever you are saying has anything to do with the argument by you and Unter- that time had to have a beginning because an infinite past would mean that today could never come.

Infinite time just like infinite numbers can have one end, namely the beginning. If time stopped today, we would be at the wrong end. We would be at a boundless bound.

We are talking about an infinite past. If you want to relate it to numbers (integers) then how many negative integers are there? We would be on the "right end" for such an infinite series. but then this really has nothing to do with whether the past is infinite.

 

[ryan]

Infinite time just like infinite numbers can have one end, namely the beginning. If time stopped today, we would be at the wrong end. We would be at a boundless bound.

No. Infinite measurements do not have "ends" (or definition). Finite measurements have "ends" (definition).

There is one end, 1, 2, 3, ...

 

[ryan]

Infinite time just like infinite numbers can have one end, namely the beginning. If time stopped today, we would be at the wrong end. We would be at a boundless bound.

We are talking about an infinite past. If you want to relate it to numbers (integers) then how many negative integers are there? We would be on the "right end" for such an infinite series. but then this really has nothing to do with whether the past is infinite.

You can start at one end, and never get to the other end. We would have to start with -1. We can't end with -1 because infinity doesn't end.

 

[skepticalbip]

We are talking about an infinite past. If you want to relate it to numbers (integers) then how many negative integers are there? We would be on the "right end" for such an infinite series. but then this really has nothing to do with whether the past is infinite.

You can start at one end, and never get to the other end. We would have to start with -1. We can't end with -1 because infinity doesn't end.

I'm sorry but that is just word salad.

If you insist on relating a number line to time then assume a number line from -infinity to +infinity. Since we can't start counting from either end because there is no end, we have to start count from where we are, "our now". So our now would be zero with yesterday -1 and tomorrow +1. We could continue to count toward -infinity and +infinity "with our now" as the reference (the only reference available on this infinite line). Tomorrow, the day we had numbered as +1 becomes our new zero (or our new now) making a new tomorrow +1 and our -1 becomes our -2 (our old "now" becomes yesterday and our old yesterday becomes the day before yesterday).

 

[Kharakov]

No. Infinite measurements do not have "ends" (or definition). Finite measurements have "ends" (definition).

There is one end, 1, 2, 3, ...

Oops..

 

[ryan]

You can start at one end, and never get to the other end. We would have to start with -1. We can't end with -1 because infinity doesn't end.

I'm sorry but that is just word salad.

If you insist on relating a number line to time then assume a number line from -infinity to +infinity. Since we can't start counting from either end because there is no end, we have to start count from where we are, "our now". So our now would be zero with yesterday -1 and tomorrow +1. We could continue to count toward -infinity and +infinity "with our now" as the reference (the only reference available on this infinite line). Tomorrow, the day we had numbered as +1 becomes our new zero (or our new now) making a new tomorrow +1 and our -1 becomes our -2 (yesterday becomes the day before yesterday).

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity. This assumes that time goes one way.

 

[Kharakov]

No. Infinite measurements do not have "ends" (or definition). Finite measurements have "ends" (definition).

There is one end, 1, 2, 3, ...

The set [1,2,3.....] has a beginning (which you can call an end, very cleverly, haha).

The size of the set is the measurement- the set itself has an "end". One can measure from the beginning to a point in the set, and get a finite value (from 1 to 101 is 100 units).

The size of the set is the infinite measurement. It is undefined.

 

[skepticalbip]

I'm sorry but that is just word salad.

If you insist on relating a number line to time then assume a number line from -infinity to +infinity. Since we can't start counting from either end because there is no end, we have to start count from where we are, "our now". So our now would be zero with yesterday -1 and tomorrow +1. We could continue to count toward -infinity and +infinity "with our now" as the reference (the only reference available on this infinite line). Tomorrow, the day we had numbered as +1 becomes our new zero (or our new now) making a new tomorrow +1 and our -1 becomes our -2 (yesterday becomes the day before yesterday).

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity.

You are confusing an arbitrary measurement system with an "end of infinity". We could have as easily chosen our calendar as the arbitrary measurement system or any other arbitrary method of counting.

This assumes that time goes one way.

Indeed it does. That is certainly the experience that humans have had. Have you ever noticed a broken plate re-assemble and jump back up onto a table?

 

[Kharakov]

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity. This assumes that time goes one way.

Read  indeterminate form. Tell me why what you said above is not correct (although in some sense it is correct to say that 0 is illogically the end of -infinity- definitely fits into the parameters of being illogical).

 

[ryan]

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity.

You are confusing an arbitrary measurement system with an "end of infinity".

It's only an "end of infinity" if there is infinite time leading up until today. Today could be the end of time; we would be at the end of infinity.

 

[ryan]

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity. This assumes that time goes one way.

Read  indeterminate form. Tell me why what you said above is not correct.

I can't find why.

 

[Juma]

I don't see how it represents a change in the order of events.

Lets look at the two events
A) The leading end of the pole leaves the tunnel
B) the trailing end enters the tunnel.

For the runner A happens before B.
For the observer at rest B happens before A.

 

[skepticalbip]

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity. This assumes that time goes one way.

Read  indeterminate form. Tell me why what you said above is not correct (although in some sense it is correct to say that 0 is illogically the end of -infinity- definitely fits into the parameters of being illogical).

 

[skepticalbip]

You are confusing an arbitrary measurement system with an "end of infinity".

It's only an "end of infinity" if there is infinite time leading up until today. Today could be the end of time; we would be at the end of infinity.

Now you are just playing games. But I'll play along. Yes, if time ended today then we would be at the end of an infinite past, but the "right end" - the end where we started counting the days back in time from our zero. Time would still have extended infinitely into the past. Although we would no longer know or care.

 

[Kharakov]

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity.

Read  indeterminate form. Tell me why what you said above is not correct.

I can't find why.

Well, you're technically right that it is illogical.

You're not applying a reflection about zero (multiplying by -1), when you constrain time to one direction. This means you are instead subtracting infinity from both "ends" (from 0 and positive infinity).

0- infinity = -infinity
infinity - infinity is not equal to 0, it is indeterminate.

 

[ryan]

Read  indeterminate form. Tell me why what you said above is not correct (although in some sense it is correct to say that 0 is illogically the end of -infinity- definitely fits into the parameters of being illogical).

NM

 

[ryan]

It's only an "end of infinity" if there is infinite time leading up until today. Today could be the end of time; we would be at the end of infinity.

Now you are just playing games.

Well if I am, then I have been playing them for days.

But I'll play along. Yes, if time ended today then we would be at the end of an infinite past, but the "right end" - the end where we started counting the days back in time from our zero. Time would still have extended infinitely into the past. Although we would no longer know or care.

It would be the wrong end - the impossible end - because of the direction of time. If time does not have a direction, then I don't know if the argument holds.

 

[ryan]

Our now of 0 is the beginning of + infinity but is still illogically the end of - infinity.

Read  indeterminate form. Tell me why what you said above is not correct.

I can't find why.

Well, you're technically right that it is illogical.

You're not applying a reflection about zero (multiplying by -1), when you constrain time to one direction. This means you are instead subtracting infinity from both "ends" (from 0 and positive infinity).

0- infinity = -infinity
infinity - infinity is not equal to 0, it is indeterminate.

I have no idea how my argument implies this. Though I do agree with your first sentence in this post.

 

[skepticalbip]

Is Kharakov switching zeros? Now this is the clearest case of "changing the goalposts" that I have ever seen.

Nope. He is just parsing your sentence.