Infinte Regress Timeline...

[PyramidHead]

There is this strange notion that in order for today to "arrive," it could not have been the case that the past is infinite, since somebody would have had to "wait" for infinity to be over before now.

What would the universe look like if the past were infinite, by this reasoning? Would there just be "no" today? Would there be a bunch of people standing around waiting for the present to happen? How would that even work?

 

[untermensche]

Saying infinite change is the same as saying an infinite number of changes. As you say, change represents the movement from one state to another. So infinite change is just an infinite number of movements from one state to another.

If I have to wait for an infinite numbers of changes to occur then I wait forever.

You are pointing out problems with the idea of infinite change. Not with the idea of using change to represent time.

Who is doing the waiting, and when did they start waiting?

Suppose the past is infinite. Now, pick any point on the timeline stretching backwards from right now. No matter what point you pick, it will be located a finite distance from the present. So, in what sense does anybody have to "wait" for an infinite number of events to occur? Beginning from when?

Yes, I know.

Imagine infinity exists and there you go.

But to imagine yourself on a timeline that extends infinitely into the past also requires knowing how you got there.

How does one get onto a line which implies that infinite time must pass before you are on it? Just saying imagine it is so doesn't cut it.

 

[ryan]

I don't see why it's nonsense. My support for untermensche's argument is based on the assumption that time only has one direction. So it must pass in one direction; and most importantly, all negative time (time before the present) must have passed.

Forget our NOW for now and think of an infinite time line from -infinity to +infinity. That should be no problem.

But because I am basing the argument on a time with one direction, starting at some point after -infinity is really asking me to accept that an infinite amount of time can pass.

Can you imagine an infinite time line? The direction toward -infinity from any event on the time line is what has already happened in the past, history. Looking back is just examining the sequence of events in history from today back through history. The direction toward +infinity is what will happen in the future. Surely you have seen historic time lines in your history calsses and had no problem grasping that it showed a series of events separated by time intervals in our past.

I don't understand what you have in mind when you say an infinite amount of time passing.

I understand timelines. My argument about -infinity to +infinity was similar to yours when I first started in this thread and argued against untermensche. Since then, I realised that starting with an infinite timeline to prove an infinite timeline was a circular argument.

Any fixed timeline, as you know, is from only one reference frame; any other frame of reference would show a different timeline. Now, the reason why I bring this up is because we can imagine that an infinite amount of time that has passed, to stay consistent, would have had to have passed in one frame of reference; this frame of reference would probably have to be larger than the universe.

Do you agree that an infinite amount of time would have had to have passed in some ageless frame of reference for its present to be 0 in (-infinity, +infinity)?

I don't understand what you have in mind when you say an infinite amount of time passing. The past is history. Everything that happened on a day last year happened last year. Everything that happened on a day a thousand years ago happened a thousand years ago. Same for a billion years ago or a trillion years ago. How far back in time is it that it becomes impossible for everything that happened on that day to have happened? The past is history. History is what happened. If you can imagine an infinite time line then all history (our past) happened along that time line between NOW and the infinite past.

 

[untermensche]

There is this strange notion that in order for today to "arrive," it could not have been the case that the past is infinite, since somebody would have had to "wait" for infinity to be over before now.

What would the universe look like if the past were infinite, by this reasoning? Would there just be "no" today? Would there be a bunch of people standing around waiting for the present to happen? How would that even work?

Exactly. The situation is irrational.

If infinite time must pass before there are people to notice it then there will never be people to notice it.

 

[PyramidHead]

Yes, I know.

Imagine infinity exists and there you go.

But to imagine yourself on a timeline that extends infinitely into the past also requires knowing how you got there.

No, it doesn't. It's purely a thought experiment for the sake of argument. For any person, anywhere on a timeline that stretches infinitely into the past, they will NOT have to wait an infinite amount of time before today. Since that applies to the whole timeline, there is no point on it that is an infinite amount of time away from the presence, so your argument fails. QED.

- - - Updated - - -

There is this strange notion that in order for today to "arrive," it could not have been the case that the past is infinite, since somebody would have had to "wait" for infinity to be over before now.

What would the universe look like if the past were infinite, by this reasoning? Would there just be "no" today? Would there be a bunch of people standing around waiting for the present to happen? How would that even work?

Exactly. The situation is irrational.

If infinite time must pass before there are people to notice it then there will never be people to notice it.

You miss the point: because the situation you created to argue your point is irrational, your argument is irrational.

Look, events that haven't occurred yet aren't sitting in some limbo "waiting" to happen. I don't know where you got that idea, but it's poisoning your thought process here.

 

[Mageth]

There is this strange notion that in order for today to "arrive," it could not have been the case that the past is infinite, since somebody would have had to "wait" for infinity to be over before now.

What would the universe look like if the past were infinite, by this reasoning? Would there just be "no" today? Would there be a bunch of people standing around waiting for the present to happen? How would that even work?

Exactly. The situation is irrational.

If infinite time must pass before there are people to notice it then there will never be people to notice it.

I see you're still just asserting "irrational, absurd, impossible." Look up a couple of posts, notice the poster who said "Just saying imagine it is so doesn't cut it." Consider what that poster said.

 

[skepticalbip]

I don't see why it's nonsense. My support for untermensche's argument is based on the assumption that time only has one direction. So it must pass in one direction; and most importantly, all negative time (time before the present) must have passed.

Forget our NOW for now and think of an infinite time line from -infinity to +infinity. That should be no problem.

But because I am basing the argument on a time with one direction, starting at some point after -infinity is really asking me to accept that an infinite amount of time can pass.

Can you imagine an infinite time line? The direction toward -infinity from any event on the time line is what has already happened in the past, history. Looking back is just examining the sequence of events in history from today back through history. The direction toward +infinity is what will happen in the future. Surely you have seen historic time lines in your history calsses and had no problem grasping that it showed a series of events separated by time intervals in our past.

I don't understand what you have in mind when you say an infinite amount of time passing.

I understand timelines. My argument about -infinity to +infinity was similar to yours when I first started in this thread and argued against untermensche. Since then, I realised that starting with an infinite timeline to prove an infinite timeline was a circular argument.

It isn't an argument trying to prove infinite time. It is a only a description of one of the two possibilities for time, either finite or infinite. A similiar description could be made for a finite time.

I'm not arguing that either is fact, only describing how infinite time works IF it is how the universe actually is. Unter is the one claiming that it is absolutely impossible and offering nothing but his "logic" based on his assumption that there is a start to time. He is caught in a circular argument of assuming a start to time to "prove" that the alternative is impossible thus "proving" a start to time.

Any fixed timeline, as you know, is from only one reference frame; any other frame of reference would show a different timeline. Now, the reason why I bring this up is because we can imagine that an infinite amount of time that has passed, to stay consistent, would have had to have passed in one frame of reference; this frame of reference would probably have to be larger than the universe.

Do you agree that an infinite amount of time would have had to have passed in some ageless frame of reference for its present to be 0 in (-infinity, +infinity)?

I can't really agree or disagree because I think you understanding of "time would have passed" is something completely different than my understanding of "events that happened on given days in the past happened on those days".

I don't understand what you have in mind when you say an infinite amount of time passing. The past is history. Everything that happened on a day last year happened last year. Everything that happened on a day a thousand years ago happened a thousand years ago. Same for a billion years ago or a trillion years ago. How far back in time is it that it becomes impossible for everything that happened on that day to have happened? The past is history. History is what happened. If you can imagine an infinite time line then all history (our past) happened along that time line between NOW and the infinite past.

 

[untermensche]

Exactly. The situation is irrational.

If infinite time must pass before there are people to notice it then there will never be people to notice it.

I see you're still just asserting "irrational, absurd, impossible." Look up a couple of posts, notice the poster who said "Just saying imagine it is so doesn't cut it." Consider what that poster said.

I did.

You simply ignored what I wrote.

We can't just say "Imagine we are somehow on a line that states there is infinite time in the past". We have to provide some argument to show this is possible and not just fanciful speculation.

So when we look at this imaginary time line and imagine we are going to place ourselves somewhere on it we have to consider the logic of the time line.

The logic of the line states that whatever point I place myself on, an infinite amount of time must occur first.

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up. In other words my place on the line never shows up.

We can't just "imagine" we are on an infinite time line. It is an illogical fanciful speculation. It points out the irrationality of believing in infinite time. It doesn't support it.

 

[PyramidHead]

I see you're still just asserting "irrational, absurd, impossible." Look up a couple of posts, notice the poster who said "Just saying imagine it is so doesn't cut it." Consider what that poster said.

I did.

You simply ignored what I wrote.

We can't just say "Imagine we are somehow on a line that states there is infinite time in the past". We have to provide some argument to show this is possible and not just fanciful speculation.

So when we look at this imaginary time line and imagine we are going to place ourselves somewhere on it we have to consider the logic of the time line.

The logic of the line states that whatever point I place myself on, an infinite amount of time must occur first.

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

 

[untermensche]

I did.

You simply ignored what I wrote.

We can't just say "Imagine we are somehow on a line that states there is infinite time in the past". We have to provide some argument to show this is possible and not just fanciful speculation.

So when we look at this imaginary time line and imagine we are going to place ourselves somewhere on it we have to consider the logic of the time line.

The logic of the line states that whatever point I place myself on, an infinite amount of time must occur first.

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

The line has a logic. It's logic states that any point on it has infinite time that has already passed before it.

So we TRY TO apply this logic to the real world.

I want to place myself on a real world point on this line but I must wait for infinite time to pass first. I can never do it.

The logic of the line prevents me from placing myself anywhere in the real world since that would require an infinite amount of time to pass first.

 

[skepticalbip]

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

The line has a logic. It's logic states that any point on it has infinite time that has already passed before it.

So we TRY TO apply this logic to the real world.

I want to place myself on a real world point on this line but I must wait for infinite time to pass first. I can never do it.

The logic of the line prevents me from placing myself anywhere in the real world since that would require an infinite amount of time to pass first.

Only if you first make the assumption that time had a beginning. In the event of infinite time (no beginning) then there was an infinite time before that point for everything to have happened in already so there is no waiting.

 

[PyramidHead]

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

The line has a logic. It's logic states that any point on it has infinite time that has already passed before it.

So we TRY TO apply this logic to the real world.

I want to place myself on a real world point on this line but I must wait for infinite time to pass first. I can never do it.

The logic of the line prevents me from placing myself anywhere in the real world since that would require an infinite amount of time to pass first.

Pass since when?

 

[PyramidHead]

It's funny, I didn't have to wait at all before I was born. The way some see it, everybody has to wait ~13 billion years before coming into existence. I don't recall any such period of waiting.

 

[untermensche]

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

The line has a logic. It's logic states that any point on it has infinite time that has already passed before it.

So we TRY TO apply this logic to the real world.

I want to place myself on a real world point on this line but I must wait for infinite time to pass first. I can never do it.

The logic of the line prevents me from placing myself anywhere in the real world since that would require an infinite amount of time to pass first.

Only if you first make the assumption that time had a beginning. In the event of infinite time (no beginning) then there was an infinite time before that point for everything to have happened in already so there is no waiting.

This doesn't address the problem.

It is easy to imagine a line that moves infinitely into two directions. That is not a problem, nor a solution.

But if I want to place myself into the real world and also follow the logic of the time line I can't do it.

To follow the logic of the timeline means that to place myself at any moment in time requires an infinite amount of time to pass first.

So I wait a billion years to place myself on the line, but I can't do it. I have to wait an infinite amount of years. I wait a billion billion years and still can't do it.

There is no number of years I have to wait until I can place myself into the real world. The amount is infinite. I can never do it.

 

[untermensche]

It's funny, I didn't have to wait at all before I was born. The way some see it, everybody has to wait ~13 billion years before coming into existence. I don't recall any such period of waiting.

So your argument is that the past is infinite because you were born?

I suppose that's as good as any I've seen yet.

 

[Mageth]

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

The line has a logic. It's logic states that any point on it has infinite time that has already passed before it.

So we TRY TO apply this logic to the real world.

I want to place myself on a real world point on this line but I must wait for infinite time to pass first. I can never do it.

The logic of the line prevents me from placing myself anywhere in the real world since that would require an infinite amount of time to pass first.

If the "logic of the line" states "any point on [the line] has infinite time that has already passed before it", then the "logic of the line" does not prevent what you asserts it prevents.

 

[Mageth]

It's funny, I didn't have to wait at all before I was born. The way some see it, everybody has to wait ~13 billion years before coming into existence. I don't recall any such period of waiting.

So your argument is that the past is infinite because you were born?

I suppose that's as good as any I've seen yet.

Your argument appears to be that the past is not infinite because you were born.

 

[Mageth]

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

The line has a logic. It's logic states that any point on it has infinite time that has already passed before it.

So we TRY TO apply this logic to the real world.

I want to place myself on a real world point on this line but I must wait for infinite time to pass first. I can never do it.

The logic of the line prevents me from placing myself anywhere in the real world since that would require an infinite amount of time to pass first.

Only if you first make the assumption that time had a beginning. In the event of infinite time (no beginning) then there was an infinite time before that point for everything to have happened in already so there is no waiting.

This doesn't address the problem.

It is easy to imagine a line that moves infinitely into two directions. That is not a problem, nor a solution.

But if I want to place myself into the real world and also follow the logic of the time line I can't do it.

To follow the logic of the timeline means that to place myself at any moment in time requires an infinite amount of time to pass first.

So I wait a billion years to place myself on the line, but I can't do it. I have to wait an infinite amount of years. I wait a billion billion years and still can't do it.

There is no number of years I have to wait until I can place myself into the real world. The amount is infinite. I can never do it.

What is all this nonsense about having to wait for something? You are in time, you are on the time line, you don't place yourself there, or here, that's just where you are (here, now). This is true whether time is finite or infinite. This is true for all events in time, whether time is finite or infinite.

 

[skepticalbip]

That's where you go off the rails again. Where does the "logic of the line" state that?

In real world terms this means I must wait for infinite time to pass first before my place on the line shows up.

Could you provide an example from the "real world" where someone has to wait for any amount of time before showing up on a timeline? I think you're really stretching the limits of comprehension now.

The line has a logic. It's logic states that any point on it has infinite time that has already passed before it.

So we TRY TO apply this logic to the real world.

I want to place myself on a real world point on this line but I must wait for infinite time to pass first. I can never do it.

The logic of the line prevents me from placing myself anywhere in the real world since that would require an infinite amount of time to pass first.

Only if you first make the assumption that time had a beginning. In the event of infinite time (no beginning) then there was an infinite time before that point for everything to have happened in already so there is no waiting.

This doesn't address the problem.

It is easy to imagine a line that moves infinitely into two directions. That is not a problem, nor a solution.

The line doesn't move in any direction. It extends in both directions.

But if I want to place myself into the real world and also follow the logic of the time line I can't do it.

Your ignorance of how the time line applies to the real world is your problem. You should work on it.

To follow the logic of the timeline means that to place myself at any moment in time requires an infinite amount of time to pass first.

And any point you want to choose on the time line would have infinite time prior to it. Time had no start on the line so from any point on the line toward either end would extend infinitely. Infinite "time has already passed".

So I wait a billion years to place myself on the line, but I can't do it. I have to wait an infinite amount of years. I wait a billion billion years and still can't do it.

There is no number of years I have to wait until I can place myself into the real world. The amount is infinite. I can never do it.

From any point on the line, an infinite amount of time would have already "passed". So there is no waiting. Jump on and enjoy the ride.

 

[untermensche]

If the "logic of the line" states "any point on [the line] has infinite time that has already passed before it", then the "logic of the line" does not prevent what you asserts it prevents.

It certainly does.

The timeline is imaginary. Anything can be imagined. And the fact that something can be imagined doesn't mean we can apply it to a real world situation.

If I look at the real world as an infinite timeline then I am forced to say that any moment in time in that real world had an infinite amount of time that happened before it.

So I try to imagine a moment in in time that had infinite time before it. I wait for that infinite time to finish because that is what it means for there to have been infinite time before any present moment. It means infinite time has already finished before that present moment.

I wait and wait for that infinite time to finish. It never does. That present moment never comes.

Just because a line with two infinite tails can be imagined doesn't mean such a thing can be applied to the real world. Many things can be imagined.