Infinte Regress Timeline...

[untermensche]

Yeah- check out this gem:

To claim that an infinite amount of time has already passed is illogical. It violates the definition of infinite time which is time that never finishes passing.

At any point in infinite time, and infinite amount of time has passed and will pass.

This is no more than saying if infinite time exists then it exists.

So you finally, after all this time, understand what infinite time is? Sheesh....

It's not anything. It's just saying lets pretend infinite time can exist. Then lets pretend a moment in time can exist with infinite time in both directions.

The whole problem was your lack of understanding of what any infinite thing or being is. So you finally understand what infinite time is if time is infinite. Seriously... wow.

You haven't presented any logical argument.

All you have said is: Let's pretend that infinite time can exist.

Now let's pretend we can view a moment in time in this imaginary infinite time.

Period. Nothing else.

Two requests to pretend and then no further argument what-so-ever.

You should be ashamed to make such a worthless argument.

 

[Kharakov]

How can we be on the "infinity-ith" hour when we know that infinity is undefined?

Bleh.. apparently he infected you too:

He's saying how can now be defined when an undefined amount of time has passed before now. This ignores that we have arbitrarily picked certain points in time as "year 1", based on vaguely defined events that are important to our various cultures. We measure time by standard rules from specific events that stand out for our various cultures- or our personal lives (like how many years old we are). This doesn't mean that God has a tally on exactly how many years had passed before you began to exist from an undefined point in the past.

You and unter might as well ask "how can you define the start of a year?" It's not like it's at a solstice or equinox. It's not like the same amount of time (measured by Cesium decay or the velocity of light in a vacuum) will pass each year. So the whole "year" thing is rather arbitrary, unless one considers that important events are important to us, and measuring from them and marking them gives us both an excuse, and reason to party. It's almost like repetitive things, like rotations, orbits, or whatever, help us focus on particular points and organize our activities around these points.

It may just be a St. Pa trick though. Which wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Kharakov]

You haven't presented any logical argument.

All you have said is: Let's pretend that infinite time can exist.

You didn't understand what infinite time is, and now you do. It's a step in the right direction. At least now you have an inkling of what is going on.

Now you have to understand how important events in infinite time give us something to focus upon, and measure from. Because without defining moments to measure from, immeasurable time passes by without notice or care.

 

[untermensche]

You haven't presented any logical argument.

All you have said is: Let's pretend that infinite time can exist.

You didn't understand what infinite time is, and now you do. It's a step in the right direction. At least now you have an inkling of what is going on.

Now you have to understand how important events in infinite time give us something to focus upon, and measure from. Because without defining moments to measure from, immeasurable time passes by without notice or care.

You haven't shown anybody anything.

You've said let's pretend and nothing else.

You think pretending is presenting something.

It's an argument fitting a religious fanatic.

You have not explained one thing about infinite time by pretending it exists and pretending you can see a moment in time within it.

 

[skepticalbip]

You haven't presented any logical argument.

All you have said is: Let's pretend that infinite time can exist.

You didn't understand what infinite time is, and now you do. It's a step in the right direction. At least now you have an inkling of what is going on.

Now you have to understand how important events in infinite time give us something to focus upon, and measure from. Because without defining moments to measure from, immeasurable time passes by without notice or care.

I gotta commend you. You seem to be displaying infinite patience and compassion.

 

[George S]

I find the idea of a day without a yesterday absurd. So what. What nature does does not depend on my feelings of absurdity. You like the idea of a day without a yesterday. So what. Time will tell.

 

[untermensche]

I find the idea of a day without a yesterday absurd. So what. What nature does does not depend on my feelings of absurdity. You like the idea of a day without a yesterday. So what. Time will tell.

This has nothing to do with liking or wanting something.

It is only a matter of being able to comprehend when a contradiction occurs.

It is a contradiction to both say that infinite time is time that never finishes and infinite time finished yesterday.

Several people in this thread can clearly see this and some can't.

And the one's that can't can't even address the problem. They make one irrelevant comment after another.

They have faith in infinite time, nothing more.

 

[skepticalbip]

I find the idea of a day without a yesterday absurd. So what. What nature does does not depend on my feelings of absurdity. You like the idea of a day without a yesterday. So what. Time will tell.

This has nothing to do with liking or wanting something.

It is only a matter of being able to comprehend when a contradiction occurs.

It is a contradiction to both say that infinite time is time that never finishes and infinite time finished yesterday.

Several people in this thread can clearly see this and some can't.

And the one's that can't can't even address the problem. They make one irrelevant comment after another.

They have faith in infinite time, nothing more.

No one is saying "infinite time is time that never finishes" except you. That is part of your misunderstanding of infinite time. An infinite past means that there is no definable starting point for time. As far back as you care to look, there is more time prior to that point.

Also no one is saying that "infinite time finished yesterday" except you. More of your misunderstanding of infinite time. Infinite time means that there is no definable end to future time. As far as you care to look ahead, there is more time after that point.

What people are saying is that we are between those two undefinable "points".

Of course this makes no sense to you because of your belief based on nothing but your belief that everything has to have definable ends. "god folks" put god at one end as the uncaused cause and heaven at the other end. Apparently they have the same problem with no ends as you do though I don't know what you are putting at the ends. If you haven't "logically" considered what to put at your ends for time then maybe the "god folks" have a better grasp of logical thinking about how there could be ends for time than you do.

 

[Kharakov]

You didn't understand what infinite time is, and now you do. It's a step in the right direction. At least now you have an inkling of what is going on.

Now you have to understand how important events in infinite time give us something to focus upon, and measure from. Because without defining moments to measure from, immeasurable time passes by without notice or care.

You haven't shown anybody anything.

That's not even possible.

You've said let's pretend and nothing else.

Pretend's etymological roots are pre:before and tendare:stretch. Obviously, if you were aware of the roots of the word, you know what was meant by "pretend".

You think pretending is presenting something.

Now, pretending, or "stretching before" is a euphemism for stretching the past..... as presenting is a euphemism for doing something presently.

It's an argument fitting a religious fanatic.

I'd shorten it to fan so you can blow me.

You have not explained one thing about infinite time by pretending it exists and pretending you can see a moment in time within it.

Well, I certainly cannot stretch before infinite time exists, because it is not possible to stretch before (or pretend) an unbounded amount of time, unless one assumes that one is outside of a timeline in another timeline in which the one timeline is created with an intact infinite past, being able to define and access any point in the infinite timeline to preBB conditions or post BB conditions.

- - - Updated - - -

You didn't understand what infinite time is, and now you do. It's a step in the right direction. At least now you have an inkling of what is going on.

Now you have to understand how important events in infinite time give us something to focus upon, and measure from. Because without defining moments to measure from, immeasurable time passes by without notice or care.

I gotta commend you. You seem to be displaying infinite patience and compassion.

Key word is seem.

 

[untermensche]

No one is saying "infinite time is time that never finishes" except you. That is part of your misunderstanding of infinite time. An infinite past means that there is no definable starting point for time. As far back as you care to look, there is more time prior to that point.

That is the definition of infinite. Infinite means to go on without end.

So when applied to time it means time without end.

Infinite does not mean the same thing as finite.

The only way yesterday could have occurred is if it occurred after the passage of finite time. If a finite amount of time occurred before yesterday then yesterday could have occurred.

But if we say an infinite amount of time occurred first then yesterday would occur after infinite time passes.

In other words it would never occur.

If you actually address the logic of this it will be the first time.

Also no one is saying that "infinite time finished yesterday" except you. More of your misunderstanding of infinite time. Infinite time means that there is no definable end to future time. As far as you care to look ahead, there is more time after that point.

Fine. Infinite time means 13 billion years occurred first then infinite time occurred second.

I can live with that. Who can say how long time will extend in the future as long as we define the amount of time in the past as finite?

 

[untermensche]

You have not explained one thing about infinite time by pretending it exists and pretending you can see a moment in time within it.

Well, I certainly cannot stretch before infinite time exists, because it is not possible to stretch before (or pretend) an unbounded amount of time, unless one assumes that one is outside of a timeline in another timeline in which the one timeline is created with an intact infinite past, being able to define and access any point in the infinite timeline to preBB conditions or post BB conditions.

It amounts to absolutely nothing.

Imagining a time line and then imagining a point on that time line is one thing but translating that into a real process is impossible.

If we say that yesterday represents some point on an infinite time line we haven't avoided the logical problem. We are still just as stuck with the conflict between saying infinite time passed before yesterday and the idea that infinite time doesn't ever finish passing.

You have done absolutely nothing with your imaginary time line.

 

[Kharakov]

The only way yesterday could have occurred is if it occurred after the passage of finite time. If a finite amount of time occurred before yesterday then yesterday could have occurred.

Apparently you have regressed to your previous misunderstanding of what infinite means.

To reiterate: It doesn't matter if an immeasurable amount of time occurred or not- yesterday is the day before today- you are measuring from today back one day.

Fine. Infinite time means 13 billion years occurred first then infinite time occurred second.

That is one of the 2 types of infinite time. One type of infinite time has a finite past, one does not. Your lack of ability to understand the 2 possible branch paths of infinite time is not going to affect the possibility that one or the other exists. You do not know.

Who can say how long time will extend in the future as long as we define the amount of time in the past as finite?

If you assume that a finite amount of time has passed. However, unless you were the one that started everything into motion, you don't know whether there is time before the BB or not.

 

[skepticalbip]

I think that our Unter has made a youtube video of this. If not then he has a like minded brethren that also believes that if you repeat what you believe enough times then it becomes reality. Sorta reminds me of Dorathy, "there's no place like home, there's no place like home,.....".

Fair warning:
This is painful to watch. But it is funny in a twisted sort of way. Although I'm thankful that he didn't carry on for an equivalent of over a hundred pages.



And like Unter, he never explains his physics for why there can be nothing before his "zero". He just asserts it as absolute truth.

 

[skepticalbip]

Well, I certainly cannot stretch before infinite time exists, because it is not possible to stretch before (or pretend) an unbounded amount of time, unless one assumes that one is outside of a timeline in another timeline in which the one timeline is created with an intact infinite past, being able to define and access any point in the infinite timeline to preBB conditions or post BB conditions.

It amounts to absolutely nothing.

Imagining a time line and then imagining a point on that time line is one thing but translating that into a real process is impossible.

If we say that yesterday represents some point on an infinite time line we haven't avoided the logical problem. We are still just as stuck with the conflict between saying infinite time passed before yesterday and the idea that infinite time doesn't ever finish passing.
.

As I explained, you are the one saying that, not anyone else. You keep refusing to address what they actually said and keep throwing up this inane strawman and pretending that is what they said.

 

[Kharakov]

stuck with the conflict between saying infinite time passed before yesterday and the idea that infinite time doesn't ever finish passing.

As I explained, you are the one saying that, not anyone else. You keep refusing to address what they actually said and keep throwing up this inane strawman and pretending that is what they said.

Yeah. If he thinks that because infinite time has passed, it has finished passing, he doesn't understand time or infinity.

 

[ryan]

How can we be on the "infinity-ith" hour when we know that infinity is undefined?

Bleh.. apparently he infected you too:

He's saying how can now be defined when an undefined amount of time has passed before now. This ignores that we have arbitrarily picked certain points in time as "year 1", based on vaguely defined events that are important to our various cultures. We measure time by standard rules from specific events that stand out for our various cultures- or our personal lives (like how many years old we are). This doesn't mean that God has a tally on exactly how many years had passed before you began to exist from an undefined point in the past.

You and unter might as well ask "how can you define the start of a year?" It's not like it's at a solstice or equinox. It's not like the same amount of time (measured by Cesium decay or the velocity of light in a vacuum) will pass each year. So the whole "year" thing is rather arbitrary, unless one considers that important events are important to us, and measuring from them and marking them gives us both an excuse, and reason to party. It's almost like repetitive things, like rotations, orbits, or whatever, help us focus on particular points and organize our activities around these points.

It may just be a St. Pa trick though. Which wouldn't surprise me.

I don't feel like you are addressing the argument here.

Do you agree that yesterday was an end to some interval of time?

Can an infinite number of days have a final day?

 

[ryan]

It amounts to absolutely nothing.

Imagining a time line and then imagining a point on that time line is one thing but translating that into a real process is impossible.

If we say that yesterday represents some point on an infinite time line we haven't avoided the logical problem. We are still just as stuck with the conflict between saying infinite time passed before yesterday and the idea that infinite time doesn't ever finish passing.
.

As I explained, you are the one saying that, not anyone else. You keep refusing to address what they actually said and keep throwing up this inane strawman and pretending that is what they said.

I agree with untermensche, so far.

Yesterday is an end to some amount of time. How could that be the end of an infinite amount of time if an infinite amount of time has no end?

This seems to be the strongest argument in my opinion.

 

[Juma]

Do you agree that yesterday was an end to some interval of time?

Do you agree that that interval could have gone on forever? Like the negative part of numbers?

What Unter doesnt get is that all this talk is about that time doesnt need to have started, it can just have been going on.

Then there is no contradiction in saying that there was infinitely time before yesterday, since the interval measured is reaching backwards in time where no limit is found (if the assumption that time has always been is true)

(And, no unter: dont pretend that you read this, you dont get it anyway)

 

[bilby]

As I explained, you are the one saying that, not anyone else. You keep refusing to address what they actually said and keep throwing up this inane strawman and pretending that is what they said.

I agree with untermensche, so far.

Yesterday is an end to some amount of time. How could that be the end of an infinite amount of time if an infinite amount of time has no end?

This seems to be the strongest argument in my opinion.

It may be the strongest argument, but it is weak as piss.

There is no reason why an infinite amount of anything has to have no end. As long as it has no beginning, it is infinite.

Endings don't enter into it.

 

[untermensche]

I agree with untermensche, so far.

Yesterday is an end to some amount of time. How could that be the end of an infinite amount of time if an infinite amount of time has no end?

This seems to be the strongest argument in my opinion.

It may be the strongest argument, but it is weak as piss.

There is no reason why an infinite amount of anything has to have no end. As long as it has no beginning, it is infinite.

Endings don't enter into it.

Infinities don't have endings. None of them. Some of them don't even have beginnings. There is no beginning or ending to the set of all fractions between 0 and 1. There is no lowest fraction and there is no highest.

But claiming infinite time has already occurred in the past is claiming an infinity has ended.

It is saying an infinite amount of time has occurred and has ended.

So now that this infinite time has ended and we are done with it we can have our present moments.

But this is ridiculous, because as stated, infinities don't have endings. Some have limits, but none have endings.