Infinte Regress Timeline...

[untermensche]

Do the nines end? If so, after how many?

No. The nines do not end.

Yes. Thank you.

And we are not talking about imaginary nines.

We are talking about time.

Time in the past is time that has passed. It has dimension unlike the number nine.

So if the time in the past is infinite that means that at any given moment infinite time has already passed.

But infinite time never passes just as the nines never end. And infinite time has no limit to be bound by.

 

[untermensche]

Saying time is finite in no way says they are wasting any time.

They are looking back. They can't look back beyond the big bang so I haven't stopped anything. The big bang has.

How is their exploring the possibility of eternal time not a waste of time if you KNOW time starts at the BB?

Somebody has to think of a way to get evidence of something before the big bang before we can make statements of any validity about things before the big bang.

Without evidence all statements are untestable.

 

[skepticalbip]

How is their exploring the possibility of eternal time not a waste of time if you KNOW time starts at the BB?

Somebody has to think of a way to get evidence of something before the big bang before we can make statements of any validity about things before the big bang.

Without evidence all statements are untestable.

Watch the fucking links I gave you. They are looking for evidence of privious universes before our current universe that gave rise to our current universe.

 

[untermensche]

Somebody has to think of a way to get evidence of something before the big bang before we can make statements of any validity about things before the big bang.

Without evidence all statements are untestable.

Watch the fucking links I gave you. They are looking for evidence of privious universes before our current universe that gave rise to our current universe.

I don't need any links to know that people are trying to figure out ways to get evidence of things before the big bang.

I wish them luck.

It wouldn't change the logic of my argument about infinite time having already passed in the past though.

Not having infinite time leaves room for a lot of time.

 

[bilby]

Watch the fucking links I gave you. They are looking for evidence of privious universes before our current universe that gave rise to our current universe.

I don't need any links to know that people are trying to figure out ways to get evidence of things before the big bang.

I wish them luck.

It wouldn't change the logic of my argument about infinite time having already passed in the past though.

Not having infinite time leaves room for a lot of time.

Not having a single reason to rule out either option leaves room for either infinite or finite time.

Despite 1,664 posts in this thread, no actual reason has been presented by anyone to show that either case is impossible. (And no, your incredulity does not count as a reason).

 

[skepticalbip]

Watch the fucking links I gave you. They are looking for evidence of privious universes before our current universe that gave rise to our current universe.

I don't need any links to know that people are trying to figure out ways to get evidence of things before the big bang.

I wish them luck.

It wouldn't change the logic of my argument about infinite time having already passed in the past though.

Not having infinite time leaves room for a lot of time.

If you bothered to watch the links you would see it doesn't. Entropy is the problem. Only an eternal time with some physical mechanism to reset entropy at the start of each universe would allow for successive universes. Your hand waving dismassal isn't at all helpful in explaining the universe.

This doesn't mean that time couldn't have begun at our BB but there is on known way in our current physics to allow it.

 

[untermensche]

Not having a single reason to rule out either option leaves room for either infinite or finite time.

Despite 1,664 posts in this thread, no actual reason has been presented by anyone to show that either case is impossible. (And no, your incredulity does not count as a reason).

The argument has been made, ignored, and forgotten countless times.

The past and the future are separated by an ever moving now. At any given "now" the amount of time in the past is the amount of time that has already passed.

So if one claims the amount of time in the past is infinite then that means the amount of time that has passed is infinite.

But the passing of infinite time is not a task that can be accomplished. The passing of infinite time is the passing of time without end.

Therefore it is not possible to claim that the amount of time in the past is infinite.

It is to claim the completion of something that doesn't complete.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't need any links to know that people are trying to figure out ways to get evidence of things before the big bang.

I wish them luck.

It wouldn't change the logic of my argument about infinite time having already passed in the past though.

Not having infinite time leaves room for a lot of time.

If you bothered to watch the links you would see it doesn't. Entropy is the problem. Only an eternal time with some physical mechanism to reset entropy at the start of each universe would allow for successive universes. Your hand waving dismassal isn't at all helpful in explaining the universe.

This doesn't mean that time couldn't have begun at our BB but there is on known way in our current physics to allow it.

The video's don't change my arguments in the least.

The arguments are still right here where you've ignored them.

 

[ryan]

Okay, then this seems to agree with me and untermensche. Everyone else thinks that it is possible for an infinite number of days to exist before today.

Absolutely not. Calling something unbounded infinite is common parlance. I tried to distinguish between the notions because you seem to think you can pick a point an infinite amount of time ago. That is not possible.

Yes, but to say that there is an infinite regress of time is to say that that point existed.

You can pick a point any amount of time ago, but that amount of time is always finite. The set of all moments of time can still be infinite. Do you see the difference?

From what I understand, the number of countable objects in a set is larger than any real number. All of the objects in a countable set is the number aleph null. That is larger than any finite number. No finite number will account for all of the objects in the set. So the number of days before today would have to be a finite number or an infinite number.

Just like there isn't a maximum number of days an immortal born today could live, why should there be a maximum age an immortal could be today?

If every finite age is possible, then there was no beginning of time. There is no need to invoke infinity.

Every finite age is possible, but the opposing argument suggests that an immortal today would have already lived an infinite number of years.

If every finite age is possible then the amount of time before today must be unbounded.

Imagine that time ends today. Assuming time moves in only one direction, today would have to be the end of an infinite number of units of time. Is this possible given a continuum and only four dimensions?

Every moment of time is still only a finite amount from today.

This seems to disagree with an infinite regression of time.

 

[skepticalbip]

The video's don't change my arguments in the least.

The arguments are still right here where you've ignored them.

Your "arguments" are nothing but statements of belief based on your ignorance of physics.

 

[untermensche]

The video's don't change my arguments in the least.

The arguments are still right here where you've ignored them.

Your "arguments" are nothing but statements of belief based on your ignorance of physics.

Once again...ignored.

 

[skepticalbip]

Your "arguments" are nothing but statements of belief based on your ignorance of physics.

Once again...ignored.

Nope. I showed you what cosmologists (people who understand a little physics) are working on is in direct contridiction to the assumptions you make, your argument, and your conclusion.

 

[bilby]

The argument has been made, ignored, and forgotten countless times.

The past and the future are separated by an ever moving now. At any given "now" the amount of time in the past is the amount of time that has already passed.

No, it is the amount of time before now. Whether or not it has 'passed'. 'passed' for whom?

So if one claims the amount of time in the past is infinite then that means the amount of time that has passed is infinite.

No.

But the passing of infinite time is not a task that can be accomplished.

The existence of infinite time in the past is not a 'task' at all. Who do you imagine performing this 'task'? God?

The passing of infinite time is the passing of time without end.

Therefore it is not possible to claim that the amount of time in the past is infinite.

You have not discussed this, much less demonstrated it.

It is to claim the completion of something that doesn't complete.

No, it isn't. Infinity does not preclude limits.

The arguments are still right here where you've ignored refuted them.

FIFY.

 

[untermensche]

No, it is the amount of time before now. Whether or not it has 'passed'. 'passed' for whom?

So now you want to change our conception of time?

After time passes we call it the past.

The past is time that has passed. It doesn't have to have passed for anyone. If it is labeled the past then it is time that has passed.

The existence of infinite time in the past is not a 'task' at all. Who do you imagine performing this 'task'? God?

You need to learn to read. The task referred to is the passing of infinite time. And I don't know who the people who claim it happened think performed it?

You have not discussed this, much less demonstrated it.

That is what infinite time means. It means time without end. I imagine an infinite future of time. When does it end?

No, it isn't. Infinity does not preclude limits.

Infinity precludes ending. An infinite series bounded by a limit doesn't end.

The arguments are still right here where you've ignored failed to refute any of them.

 

[Kharakov]

I wonder if you say anything correct in any threads?

 

[ryan]

So what? There's still no day in the "endless arithmetic series of days" of which one could say that said immortal could not reach that day. Just like there's no point in the past from which one could say that today could not have been reached.

Let me try something else.

Let's assume that there is some frame of reference that existed a countably infinite number of years ago from today. It would have had a beginning; it would have a first year.

On its first year, there is no upper bound. If time ended today, then there is an upper bound for the same frame of reference. This is a clear contradiction.

This is the best that I can do.

 

[bilby]

So now you want to change our conception of time?

No, I only want to change your conception of time. Everyone else seems to understand it already, so change is not required.

After time passes we call it the past.

That is true.

The past is time that has passed.

But by extending your statement, you render it untrue. After time passes, we call it the past, because that time has been added to the past that was already there.

It doesn't have to have passed for anyone. If it is labeled the past then it is time that has passed.

Nonsense. Time passing is an observation; who is the observer? Time in the past may have been observed passing, or it may not.

The existence of infinite time in the past is not a 'task' at all. Who do you imagine performing this 'task'? God?

You need to learn to read. The task referred to is the passing of infinite time. And I don't know who the people who claim it happened think performed it?

Nobody is claiming it happened; and only you are claiming it is a task. A task requires an actor to perform it. The idea that the existence of anything is a 'task' is absurd. You are making a category error.

You have not discussed this, much less demonstrated it.

That is what infinite time means. It means time without end.

You keep saying this; but it ain't so. Nothing about the definition of 'infinite' implies the absence of an end; This has been shown to you repeatedly. Time without end would be infinite, but infinite time need not be without end. All thumbs are fingers, but not all fingers are thumbs.

I imagine an infinite future of time. When does it end?

An infinite future does not end. An infinite past does not begin. If you can imagine an infinite future, starting now, then why can't you also imagine the reverse - an infinite past, ending now?

No, it isn't. Infinity does not preclude limits.

Infinity precludes ending.

No, it doesn't.

An infinite series bounded by a limit doesn't end.

Yes it does.

 

[beero1000]

Absolutely not. Calling something unbounded infinite is common parlance. I tried to distinguish between the notions because you seem to think you can pick a point an infinite amount of time ago. That is not possible.

Yes, but to say that there is an infinite regress of time is to say that that point existed.

It does not. It says that no matter how far you go back, you can still go farther. Any point in time is still a finite number of days from today.

You can pick a point any amount of time ago, but that amount of time is always finite. The set of all moments of time can still be infinite. Do you see the difference?

From what I understand, the number of countable objects in a set is larger than any real number. All of the objects in a countable set is the number aleph null. That is larger than any finite number. No finite number will account for all of the objects in the set. So the number of days before today would have to be a finite number or an infinite number.

No. The number of days before today could be infinite and AT THE SAME TIME each day would only be a finite number of days before today.

Just like there isn't a maximum number of days an immortal born today could live, why should there be a maximum age an immortal could be today?

If every finite age is possible, then there was no beginning of time. There is no need to invoke infinity.

Every finite age is possible, but the opposing argument suggests that an immortal today would have already lived an infinite number of years.

If every finite age is possible then the amount of time before today must be unbounded.

Imagine that time ends today. Assuming time moves in only one direction, today would have to be the end of an infinite number of units of time. Is this possible given a continuum and only four dimensions?

Yes.

Every moment of time is still only a finite amount from today.

This seems to disagree with an infinite regression of time.

It doesn't.

You seem to be the only person in the thread who is actually trying, so I'll try to help. Take the real line as our measurement of time. This instant is at 0. For any real number x, that number is only a finite distance from 0. At the same time, for any choice of bound M there are real numbers farther from 0 than M. These are not mutually contradictory.

 

[skepticalbip]

I wonder if you say anything correct in any threads?

I can't help but believe that Unter must hold some beliefs that are in line with reality. Survival would have been difficult otherwise. It is just that, in this thread, any understanding of anything to do with physics, science, and logic have been replaced with "pull it out yo arse" assertions.

 

[ryan]

Yes, but to say that there is an infinite regress of time is to say that that point existed.

It does not. It says that no matter how far you go back, you can still go farther. Any point in time is still a finite number of days from today.

Okay, but my issue is with an infinite number days existing before today, not a finite number of days.

 

[beero1000]

It does not. It says that no matter how far you go back, you can still go farther. Any point in time is still a finite number of days from today.

Okay, but my issue is with an infinite number days existing before today, not a finite number of days.

An infinite number of days can exist before today while at the same time each day only lies a finite number of days before today.