What does it mean for something to be "logically possible"?

[untermensche]

So you just ignore everything said before?

Early Alzheimer's?

Or is it your religion again and it's prohibition against counting?

One more time. Let us count the years in the past in time with no beginning.

The last year is year #1 in our count, the year before that is year #2, and so on.......

If time never began then our counting of the years will never end.

Years that never end is an amount of time that never ends.

Your argument has this form:
1) I can count the time in this interval in this way.

To try to find the amount. I know, in your religion, forbidden.

2) My count has this end property

My count begins at 1.

3) Therefore the time in this interval has the same end property.

Therefore the amount of time I count is the amount of time contained in the concept.

If you actually have the nerve to try to count the amount of time contained in the phrase "time with no beginning" you will see it is an amount that has no end.

 

[bilby]

Exactly what it says.

You talked about rocks with no beginning.

What is that? Where would we find such rocks?

Don't ask me; It's your thought experiment, you are responsible for providing the required hardware.

If the count never ends you are talking about an amount of time that never ends. is infinite.

FTFY.

Now all you need to do is to show that 'infinite' always implies 'without end';

All you have to do is try to count it.

Count the time in the past with no beginning.

What is the amount?

It is infinite; which is synonymous with 'uncountable'.

Does the amount end or does it not end?

It ends by definition - that's what 'in the past' means. It means 'ending now'.

 

[beero1000]

Your argument has this form:
1) I can count the time in this interval in this way.

To try to find the amount. I know, in your religion, forbidden.

2) My count has this end property

My count begins at 1.

3) Therefore the time in this interval has the same end property.

Therefore the amount of time I count is the amount of time contained in the concept.

If you actually have the nerve to try to count the amount of time contained in the phrase "time with no beginning" you will see it is an amount that has no end.

You seriously think people are disagreeing about whether or not an infinite past is infinite? No one is disagreeing with that. Everyone is telling you how you are projecting your misunderstandings about beginnings and endings onto every infinite interval of time.

None of what you responded actually has any effect on the form of your argument. You are still claiming the equivalent of 'the hour from 7:00 to 8:00 ends at 7:00'.

 

[untermensche]

All you have to do is try to count it.

Count the time in the past with no beginning.

What is the amount?

It is infinite; which is synonymous with 'uncountable'.

Uncountable in a particular way. The count never ends. The count goes on and on.

If the counting of some amount of time goes on and on then the amount of time goes on and on.

It never ends.

Does the amount end or does it not end?

It ends by definition - that's what 'in the past' means. It means 'ending now'.

The past ending is not evidence it was infinite.

 

[untermensche]

To try to find the amount. I know, in your religion, forbidden.

2) My count has this end property

My count begins at 1.

3) Therefore the time in this interval has the same end property.

Therefore the amount of time I count is the amount of time contained in the concept.

If you actually have the nerve to try to count the amount of time contained in the phrase "time with no beginning" you will see it is an amount that has no end.

You seriously think people are disagreeing about whether or not an infinite past is infinite?

Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?

Show me using infinite time in the future.

 

[bilby]

It is infinite; which is synonymous with 'uncountable'.

Uncountable in a particular way.

Well, yes; But that's not actually important - and it's the EXACT opposite of the 'way' you think.

The count never ends.

No, it never BEGINS.

The count goes on and on.

Yes, it is infinite; Uncountable.

If the counting of some amount of time goes on and on then the amount of time goes on and on.

Yes.

It never ends.

In this case, it does end. It never begins.

Does the amount end or does it not end?

It ends. That's the DEFINITION of 'the past'.

It ends by definition - that's what 'in the past' means. It means 'ending now'.

The past ending is not evidence it was infinite.

No. The past not beginning is, though.

We don't know whether of not it has a beginning; But if it doesn't, then it must be infinite. So the only way to show that it is logically impossible for the past to be infinite would be to show that time with no beginning entails a logical contradiction.

Instead, you are wasting everyone's time mired in your confused misapprehension that 'uncountable' somehow must imply 'endless' - but as it doesn't, you are just going around in circles.

 

[bilby]

To try to find the amount. I know, in your religion, forbidden.

2) My count has this end property

My count begins at 1.

3) Therefore the time in this interval has the same end property.

Therefore the amount of time I count is the amount of time contained in the concept.

If you actually have the nerve to try to count the amount of time contained in the phrase "time with no beginning" you will see it is an amount that has no end.

You seriously think people are disagreeing about whether or not an infinite past is infinite?

Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?

Show me using infinite time in the future.

Infinite (or, indeed, finite) time in the future cannot have passed.

Infinite (or, indeed, finite) time in the past cannot do anything other than have passed. That's the defining feature of 'past' vs 'future'.

Is finite time an amount of time that can pass? (I know the answer is 'yes')

Show me using finite time in the future. (I know you can't, because your demand is unreasonable and impossible - but in no way supports your claim. It's just a dishonest rhetorical device, and not even a very clever one).

Time in the past has passed. Time in the future has not passed. The amount of time in question is completely irrelevant to these facts.

 

[untermensche]

The count never ends.

No, it never BEGINS.

A count that never begins is a count that never takes place.

Of course the counting begins.

It begins with year #1 in the past and continues from there.

In this case, it does end. It never begins.

You are lost. The counting begins at year # 1 in the past.

That is how you try to count a past with "no beginning".

You cannot begin a count at "no beginning".

The past ending is not evidence it was infinite.

No. The past not beginning is, though.

You have no evidence of that.

You know what evidence is?

 

[untermensche]

To try to find the amount. I know, in your religion, forbidden.

2) My count has this end property

My count begins at 1.

3) Therefore the time in this interval has the same end property.

Therefore the amount of time I count is the amount of time contained in the concept.

If you actually have the nerve to try to count the amount of time contained in the phrase "time with no beginning" you will see it is an amount that has no end.

You seriously think people are disagreeing about whether or not an infinite past is infinite?

Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?

Show me using infinite time in the future.

Infinite (or, indeed, finite) time in the future cannot have passed.

That is not the question.

 

[bilby]

No, it never BEGINS.

A count that never begins is a count that never takes place.

Indeed. Infinity is, by definition, uncountable. Why you feel a need to count the past, the present, or even all of time, I do not know; But it is not possible to do so if it is infinite.

Of course the counting begins.

It begins at the end of the past.

It begins with year #1 in the past and continues from there.

Yes. And year #1 is the END of the past.

In this case, it does end. It never begins.

You are lost. The counting begins at year # 1 in the past.

You are lost. The COUNTING begins at year #1 in the past; The PAST ends at year #1 in the past. The counting is not the objects being counted.

That is how you try to count a past with "no beginning".

No, it's how you try - I recognize it to be futile, and don't bother.

You cannot begin a count at "no beginning".

True. So you have to begin your count at "the end". If the past had no end, you wouldn't be able to begin counting there, would you?

The past ending is not evidence it was infinite.

No. The past not beginning is, though.

You have no evidence of that.

You know what evidence is?

We are not discussing evidence. We are discussing logical possibility.

The past ending tells us EXACTLY nothing about whether or not it began, or whether or not it is infinite. The past ending is the very essence of the definition of 'the past'; If it didn't end, it wouldn't BE 'the past'.

If it is infinite, then it MUST be an infinity that ends; Because the past is defined by the fact that it has an end. We don't know, from the fact that it ends, whether or not it is infinite; You cannot use the fact that it ends as evidence that it is finite.

 

[bilby]

To try to find the amount. I know, in your religion, forbidden.

2) My count has this end property

My count begins at 1.

3) Therefore the time in this interval has the same end property.

Therefore the amount of time I count is the amount of time contained in the concept.

If you actually have the nerve to try to count the amount of time contained in the phrase "time with no beginning" you will see it is an amount that has no end.

You seriously think people are disagreeing about whether or not an infinite past is infinite?

Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?

Show me using infinite time in the future.

Infinite (or, indeed, finite) time in the future cannot have passed.

That is not the question.

No, it's the ERROR in your question.

Badly formed questions are unanswerable; Your ability to present an unanswerable challenge by setting unreasonable constraints is evidence only of your duplicity.

 

[untermensche]

It begins with year #1 in the past and continues from there.

Yes. And year #1 is the END of the past.

In this case, it does end. It never begins.

You are lost. The COUNTING begins at 1. The last year is year #1. That is where the COUNTING begins.

The counting of the amount of time in "time that never begins" never ends.

This means it is an amount of time that never ends.

- - - Updated - - -

Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?

Badly formed questions are unanswerable; Your ability to present an unanswerable challenge by setting unreasonable constraints is evidence only of your duplicity.

And when people don't want to admit their position is absurd they suddenly can't answer any questions.

 

[bilby]

Yes. And year #1 is the END of the past.

In this case, it does end. It never begins.

You are lost. The COUNTING begins at 1. The last year is year #1. That is where the COUNTING begins.

Indeed. And the COUNTING never ends; Unlike the past, whose last year is year #1.

The counting of the amount of time in "time that never begins" never ends.

Yes; that's why we call it 'infinite' - because it is uncountable.

This means it is an amount of time that never ends.

No, it doesn't. It means an uncountable amount of time for which last year is year #1 - it ENDS at Year #1.

- - - Updated - - -

Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?

Badly formed questions are unanswerable; Your ability to present an unanswerable challenge by setting unreasonable constraints is evidence only of your duplicity.

And when people don't want to admit their position is absurd they suddenly can't answer any questions.

I have answered all of your questions; or provided reasons why they are either not relevant, or too poorly formed to answer.

It is impossible to give an example IN THE FUTURE of time that HAS ENDED (by definition), and your demand for such an example is unreasonable, regardless of the amount of time under discussion.

And your creative editing to make it appear that I didn't answer the simple question "Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?" is noted.

The actual (unedited) form of your question was:

Is infinite time an amount of time that can pass?

Show me using infinite time in the future.

(my bold).

Infinite time IS an amount of time that can pass, as I have said repeatedly. But to do so, it MUST be time in the past, that has no beginning.

Nobody is impressed by your duplicity. We can all see what you are doing, and assess your honesty for ourselves. If you can't prove your point in an honest discussion, why should anyone accept it when you are being underhanded?

 

[Kharakov]

Holy fuck, unter's ravings are getting even more incoherent. Unter- deep breath buddy, just don't force choke any subordinates in anger.

You can't count an infinite past. It didn't start. There is no starting point of eternity.

 

[untermensche]

Holy fuck, unter's ravings are getting even more incoherent. Unter- deep breath buddy, just don't force choke any subordinates in anger.

You can't count an infinite past. It didn't start. There is no starting point of eternity.

Nothing has changed. My position has not changed one bit.

There is no argument that forces me to change anything.

An infinite amount of time is an amount of time that never passes.

Nobody can just by magic make it pass. It cannot pass.

It is time that goes on and on.

Claiming it already happened somehow is laughably ignorant. It is like saying I just walked infinite miles.

 

[untermensche]

You are lost. The COUNTING begins at 1. The last year is year #1. That is where the COUNTING begins.

Indeed. And the COUNTING never ends; Unlike the past, whose last year is year #1.

Yes the past ends. Which is why is could not have been infinite.

But this is about checking he claim that the time in the past was infinite. When you count the time you see it is an amount without end.

An amount of time without end could not have ended.

Infinite time IS an amount of time that can pass

That's a lie.

Show me how.

 

[Kharakov]

Holy fuck, unter's ravings are getting even more incoherent. Unter- deep breath buddy, just don't force choke any subordinates in anger.

You can't count an infinite past. It didn't start. There is no starting point of eternity.

Nothing has changed. My position has not changed one bit.

So what, your stated position is incorrect.

There is no argument that forces me to change anything.

You're like a creationist with a dinosaur bone, ehh?

An infinite amount of time is an amount of time that never passes.

Since something has always existed, and something has always been changing, an infinite amount of time has passed. You don't get to redefine what happened in the past to fit your narrow, incorrect interpretation of reality.

Nobody can just by magic make it pass. It cannot pass.

Sure Gandalf. Whatever you say.

Claiming it already happened somehow is laughably ignorant. It is like saying I just walked infinite miles.

Well, if you have always been walking, for all eternity, you would have walked infinite miles. Seriously man, you should take a break from the walking.

- - - Updated - - -

Infinite time IS an amount of time that can pass

That's a lie. Show me how.

Multiple people have. It doesn't make a difference. You refuse to acknowledge the truth.

 

[untermensche]

Infinite time IS an amount of time that can pass

That's a lie. Show me how.

Multiple people have. It doesn't make a difference. You refuse to acknowledge the truth.

That is another lie. The only thing anybody has done here is CLAIM it is possible for an infinite amount of time to pass. They look at a number line and somehow think it is possible that you can transverse infinite numbers. They confuse the end of an infinite line for it's beginning.

It is impossible to count infinite numbers. It is impossible to travel infinite miles. It is impossible to have infinite time in the past. No infinity can be realized.

 

[bilby]

That's a lie. Show me how.

Multiple people have. It doesn't make a difference. You refuse to acknowledge the truth.

That is another lie. The only thing anybody has done here is CLAIM it is possible for an infinite amount of time to pass. They look at a number line and somehow think it is possible that you can transverse infinite numbers. They confuse the end of an infinite line for it's beginning.

It is impossible to count infinite numbers. It is impossible to travel infinite miles. It is impossible to have infinite time in the past. No infinity can be realized.

One of these things is not like the others.

It's impossible to count infinite numbers; but it's perfectly possible to have infinite numbers (for example, the natural numbers are infinite).

It's impossible to travel infinite miles; but it's perfectly possible to have infinite miles (for example, the number of miles due East of any point on the Earth's surface, other than the poles).

It's impossible to experience infinite time; but it's perfectly possible to have infinite time (for example, the amount of time in the future if there is no end to time).

Having is not doing.

If the past is infinite, then the past was always infinite, and infinite time has always passed.

Some infinities are real. Whether you like it or not.

The infinite past might or might not be - certainly you haven't shown it not to be by making the demonstrably false claim that "No infinity can be realized". No matter what you mean by 'realized', this silliness doesn't stand up to the slightest scrutiny.

 

[fast]

Untermensche offers us the opportunity to explore the appearance that there's a compatibility issue with an infinite past and us being in the here and now. By his assertion, we couldn't be in the present if an infinite numbers of years must have already passed us by since an infinite number of years ago has no beginning of time. Since we are alive in the here and now, then on his account, an infinite number of years past is an impossibility.