• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

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

Can we forget about time for a moment and focus on the string? Why does the static string have to end?

But we do not have a string.

We have time that has passed.

If it has ALL passed then it had to be a finite amount of time that passed.

But the string is really just a way to look at time. If you think of a string as an object taking up a dimension then we should be able to do the same for time. Each 0 dimensional point particle would actually represent a string through time. The string ending in your backyard is just perpendicular to a particle/string ending now.

So if you accept this equivalence of strings to particles in time, can you see how this isn't really a problem? Or at least we can talk about the string ending in your backyard the same way we can talk about a particle in your backyard.
 
But we do not have a string.

We have time that has passed.

If it has ALL passed then it had to be a finite amount of time that passed.

But the string is really just a way to look at time. If you think of a string as an object taking up a dimension then we should be able to do the same for time. Each 0 dimensional point particle would actually represent a string through time. The string ending in your backyard is just perpendicular to a particle/string ending now.

So if you accept this equivalence of strings to particles in time, can you see how this isn't really a problem? Or at least we can talk about the string ending in your backyard the same way we can talk about a particle in your backyard.

There is no doubt that at every moment ALL the time in the past has finished.

If it ALL can finish then it was finite.

We don't have to search anywhere to know this beyond doubt.
 
Can we forget about time for a moment and focus on the string? Why does the static string have to end?

But we do not have a string.

We have time that has passed.

If it has ALL passed then it had to be a finite amount of time that passed.

- - - Updated - - -

The past is FIXED.

It is unchanging. Unchangeable.

It could only be finite.

So much wrong in so few words.

It's a real skill.

Not a useful skill, but real, nevertheless.

You are so lost it isn't funny.
I know exactly where I am, thanks all the same.
At any moment the past cannot grow. It cannot change.
Not a well formed claim. It's impossible to tell what, exactly, you mean by this.
It is static and unchanging.
The past is always changing; it exists in reference to 'now' which is not a fixed point. But even if we consider an unchanging period of time with no beginning, such as 'all time before 1 January 1900', which is static and unchanging, this claim:

Would be utter bollocks.

Infinities need not change, in order to be infinite.

You simply don't have clue one about infinity as a mathematical entity.

Until and unless you learn what 'infinity' means (and what it does not mean), you are simply unqualified to engage in this discussion at all.

You should consult a mathematician. It would make a pleasant change from insulting them.
 
But the string is really just a way to look at time. If you think of a string as an object taking up a dimension then we should be able to do the same for time. Each 0 dimensional point particle would actually represent a string through time. The string ending in your backyard is just perpendicular to a particle/string ending now.

So if you accept this equivalence of strings to particles in time, can you see how this isn't really a problem? Or at least we can talk about the string ending in your backyard the same way we can talk about a particle in your backyard.

There is no doubt that at every moment ALL the time in the past has finished.

If it ALL can finish then it was finite.

We don't have to search anywhere to know this beyond doubt.

But do you see how the string and the history of a particle are same thing except just facilitated by their respective perpendicular dimensions? If you are going to stick with a static time, then does it make sense to say that the string finishes the same way the particle finishes?
 
A car in the present is still going 100 m/s because it is the rate of change at that moment. That's why we have derivatives with different values.

What does that have to do with my points?

Can the PAST change?

IMO nothing changes except the point of reference. This causes only comparisons to change for the point of reference. So sure, matter doesn't change in 4 dimensions. It sits there eternally with a size, a size unknown. A size that we don't know ends, like a string dangling in your backyard.
 
What does that have to do with my points?

Can the PAST change?

IMO nothing changes except the point of reference. This causes only comparisons to change for the point of reference. So sure, matter doesn't change in 4 dimensions. It sits there eternally with a size, a size unknown. A size that we don't know ends, like a string dangling in your backyard.

Time is a dimension.

Time and space are what allows change to take place.

And all the change that ever took place ended at the present moment.

No more change in the past will take place.

The past when looked at from any present moment is static and unchanging.

Finite.
 
At any moment the past cannot grow. It cannot change.

Not a well formed claim. It's impossible to tell what, exactly, you mean by this.

The old Sgt. Schultz ploy. You know nothing.

At any moment "the past" is an amount of time that cannot increase.

It has ALL passed. It is ALL gone. It will not magically increase somehow. More of it will not show up somewhere.

The only way for ALL of it to be gone is if it was finite.
 
How much does an infinite number of bricks weigh? Less than a pound or more than a pound?

If a brick has any weight then an infinite amount of them weighs infinitely more than a pound.

At any moment the time in the past is complete. It is over.

There is a finite amount of it, there must be for it ALL to have passed.
 
How is it possible that ALL the time in the past has passed at any given moment if it was infinite?

And please I beg. No moron talking about an infinite amount of something totally imaginary and dimensionless.
 
How is it possible that ALL the time in the past has passed at any given moment if it was infinite?
Do you understand that a point particle would be a 2d string ending in the present (presumably) but extending into the past?

Why does this string have to be finite? Does a string ending in your yard have to be finite?
 
How much does an infinite number of bricks weigh? Less than a pound or more than a pound?

If a brick has any weight then an infinite amount of them weighs infinitely more than a pound.

I agree. The problem I'm having is that you agree. I thought you would of disagreed and that you haven't bothers me.

I will explain why I say that.

Let's say a brick weighs 2 pounds. The idea of a brick (which is something of a completely different nature) for all practical purposes doesn't weigh anything. The idea of a brick weighs about as much as the idea of a mountain. Ideas don't weigh much at all. Bricks, well, they do weigh something, and if you put a bunch of them together, they can get pretty darn heavy.

Ideas and concepts have similarities. There is a difference, but one similarity is how much they weigh. They weigh about the same. Either they weigh nothing or slightly more than nothing, but either way, the idea or concept of 2,000 bricks weighs very (very) little. Contrast that with the weight of 2000 bricks, and oh boy, that's a big difference.

When you talk of infinity (which is something I thought you denied even existed ... and as such, I figured it would weigh nothing or very little at most), you speak of it as being an idea. How in the world are you employing the term which you say can't describe anything in the real world and applying it to things that do? What the hell is an infinite number of bricks in your world? I'm not ranting, just being expressive. I'm as calm as can be.

If there is no such thing as an infinite number of bricks in the real world, then I would expect the weight to be rather small (virtually nonexistent), and if you ping pong it from the world of the physical to the world of the mental, then I'm back to saying the weight (again) is awfully small.

In contrast, there seems to be a part of you that still latches on to the notion that we're moving towards infinity if there should be such a thing: 1 brick, 2 bricks, 3 bricks, 4 ... On and on marching towards infinity, as if it could somehow be out there in the continued direction, but it's in the pursuit of a destiny never for us to clasp at an infinite number of bricks that you retreat and speak of it as being no such thing.

So, which is it? At this point, I don't even care about the truth; I just want to find coherence; actuality can be damned. What are we talking about? I mean, what's the nature of that which is under discussion? When you throw in words like "idea," and yet speak of bricks, I'm going to think you're not talking about bricks but instead the idea of bricks, but on the other hand, if you're talking about something not existing like an infinite number of bricks, then the weight of something as such, even in the real world, is not going to weigh much in my book.
 
UM how many present moments exist per second using your definitions; is it a finite number or an infinite number?

Since an infinite number of anything cannot "pass" it has to be finite. Anything real that is.

The real question is: How many UNIQUE moments exist per second?

But what does this have to do with the impossibility of a static past being infinite?
 
UM how many present moments exist per second using your definitions; is it a finite number or an infinite number?

Since an infinite number of anything cannot "pass" it has to be finite. Anything real that is.

The real question is: How many UNIQUE moments exist per second?

Yeah, good point. Are they finite too?

But what does this have to do with the impossibility of a static past being infinite?
I am actually just trying to see time how you are and also trying to get you to see time the way I am. And then we can see if infinite time is logical or not from both points of view.

I think that's what I am doing.
 
What the hell is an infinite number of bricks in your world?

You start with one. Add another.

Keep going. Forever.
When Forever ends that's infinity.
You have a number of bricks without end.

Always something real.
Is it your belief that everything infinite is only an idea and there are no realized infinities possible in nature?
 
Back
Top Bottom