Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

Actual Infinity does not exist. First just to remind the two types of infinity:

Potenial Infinity
Characterised by a repeating process, such as repeatedly adding to a number. These processes increases towards infinity without ever actually reaching it.

Actual Infinity
This is what most people think of when they say infinity; a non-finite number or quantity. Examples would be the actual existence of a completed infinite set or a physical property like length, mass taking on an infinite value.

Actual Infinity is impossible. I have numerous arguments:

Numerical Argument
- Assume Actual Infinity exists as a quantity
- Then there must be a quantity X such that X > all other quantities
- But X + 1 > X
- There is no such quantity
- Actual Infinity is not a quantity

Materialistic Argument
- How exactly is Actual Infinity and the materialistic world view comparable?
- For example, can a physical quantity larger than any other possible physical quantity exist?

Geometrical Argument
- It is impossible to construct a line segment with the property that it is longer than all other line segments

The real number line
- Consider the Numbers on the real number line.
- For example between 0 and 1.
- Does the interval contain an actual infinity of numbers?
- No.
- Numbers have length zero
- they are just logical labels on a line
- So the length of the interval 1 divided by the length of a number 0 equals UNDEFINED.

The counting paradox
- Say you meet an Eternal being in your Eternal universe
- You notice he is counting
- You ask and he says ‘I’ve always been counting’
- What number is he on?

The Measure Problem
- Assume time is eternal.
- If it can happen it will happen.
- An infinite number of times.
- No matter how unlikely it was in the first place!
- So all things happen an infinite number of times.
- So all things are equally likely.
- Reductio ad absurdum. Time is not eternal

The passage of time
- Time clearly passes
- Time cannot have started passing infinity long ago because there is no way to get to today.

2nd Law of Thermodynamics
- If the universe has been around for ever then it should be in thermodynamic equilibrium by now.
- But the universe is not in thermodynamic equilibrium

The Big Bang
- Looks suspiciously like the start of time

Paradoxes are solved
- Galileo's paradox is solved: There are less squares than numbers because not all numbers are squares. Yet each number has a square so the number of numbers and squares must be the same. He is trying to compare two actually infinite sets, IE comparing two undefined things. A set definition is not complete until all its members are iterated.
- Hilbert’s infinite hotel paradox is solved; such a hotel cannot exist.
- Cantor's Paradox: ‘The set of all sets is its own power set. Therefore, the cardinal number of the set of all sets must be bigger than itself.’ The set of all sets is an ACTUAL INFINITY so not a completely described set. You cannot soundly reason with it. Leads to the paradox.
- Zeno’s paradoxes are solved. Time and space are discrete (separate proof)

Common sense View
- The Actually Infinite exists.
- Reductio ad absurdum.
- No it doesn’t.
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by RJG »

Devans, I notice you shy away from attacking the term "always existing", and instead prefer to attack the misleading word "infinity" instead. An "always existing" universe has NO starting point, whereas "infinity" implies a starting point (occurring an infinite time ago). Logic tells us that the universe has ALWAYS EXISTED. Can you prove this otherwise?

Devans99 wrote:Actual Infinity is impossible. I have numerous arguments:

Numerical Argument
Materialistic Argument
Geometrical Argument
The real number line
The counting paradox
The Measure Problem
The passage of time
Paradoxes are solved
These are all bogus arguments because they all rely on "infinity" having a 'specific value', that can either be mathematically manipulated, or physically compared/measured. You can't 'pin down' "infinity" to a specific number/value, and then treat it as such, otherwise you are just playing Zeno games. Infinity is not a mathematical construct that can be manipulated/compared/added/subtracted/multiplied/divided/etc.

As Karpal so eloquently stated "Cut infinity in two and each 'half' is still infinite."

Devans99 wrote:2nd Law of Thermodynamics
- If the universe has been around forever then it should be in thermodynamic equilibrium by now.
- But the universe is not in thermodynamic equilibrium
If I were to use your flawed reasoning, then I would simply say -- we are not in thermodynamic equilibrium yet, because we are not at the end of infinity yet!

Devans99 wrote:The Big Bang
- Looks suspiciously like the start of time
This is logically incoherent. If there is no (pre-existing) 'time' to "bang", then the Big Bang could not "bang" out the start of 'time'. Time can't exist BEFORE it exists.


Devans99 wrote:"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth"
Agreed. Causation is impossible in a timeless/matterless/spaceless state. Therefore it is IMPOSSIBLE for the universe to be caused/created. (i.e. causation is not possible until AFTER the creation of the universe). And so, as per your statement above, it appears we then both agree:

"The universe has ALWAYS EXISTED".
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

RJG wrote: October 10th, 2018, 12:32 pm Devans, I notice you shy away from attacking the term "always existing", and instead prefer to attack the misleading word "infinity" instead. An "always existing" universe has NO starting point, whereas "infinity" implies a starting point (occurring an infinite time ago). Logic tells us that the universe has ALWAYS EXISTED. Can you prove this otherwise?
Something which has no starting point cannot exist and is paradoxical as I demonstrated multiple times. Give me an example of something without a start from the real world...
RJG wrote: October 10th, 2018, 12:32 pm These are all bogus arguments because they all rely on "infinity" having a 'specific value', that can either be mathematically manipulated, or physically compared/measured. You can't 'pin down' "infinity" to a specific number/value, and then treat it as such, otherwise you are just playing Zeno games. Infinity is not a mathematical construct that can be manipulated/compared/added/subtracted/multiplied/divided/etc.
Infinity is not a mathematical construct. Nether does it exist in the real world. Its just a flawed, contradictory concept. You were brainwashed just like me with this infinity stuff. I've got over it. Give me an example of Actual Infinity from the real world...
RJG wrote: October 10th, 2018, 12:32 pm "The universe has ALWAYS EXISTED".
Yes, but in the sense Einstein taught us about. You have to imagine all of space-time as a static block that has existed always and incorporates time. Why is this difficult? Do you disagree with Special Relativity? Nearly all scientists and philosophers buy it. Why do you not buy it?
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by RJG »

Devans99 wrote:Something which has no starting point cannot exist and is paradoxical as I demonstrated multiple times.
Why can't it exist? And where have you demonstrated it? I've only seen your references to an "infinite starting point", but not to a "NO starting point" (as in "always existing").

Devans99 wrote:Give me an example of something without a start from the real world…
Circles have no starting point. Where is the beginning of a circle?
Time has no starting point. Where is the beginning of time?

Devans99 wrote:Infinity is not a mathematical construct. Nether does it exist in the real world. Its just a flawed, contradictory concept. You were brainwashed just like me with this infinity stuff. I've got over it. Give me an example of Actual Infinity from the real world…
Devans, I don't necessarily disagree with you here, which is the reason I always avoid using this misleading/deceptive word. So with that said, can you make a case that "always existing" is impossible, and do so WITHOUT basing your arguments on (this deceptive word) "infinity"?

RJG wrote:"The universe has ALWAYS EXISTED".
Devans99 wrote:Yes, but in the sense Einstein taught us about. You have to imagine all of space-time as a static block that has existed always and incorporates time. Why is this difficult? Do you disagree with Special Relativity? Nearly all scientists and philosophers buy it. Why do you not buy it?
You must see something that I don't. When I say "the universe has ALWAYS EXISTED", this is based on logic, (not science!) It is based wholly on the simplified logic that X can't exist before X exists, ...and not upon Einstein/Special Relativity/or anything else.

1. Starting/creating/causing implies 'time'. Nothing happens in a timeless state. Without the pre-existence of time, there can be no starting/creating/causing of anything. Therefore it is logically impossible for time to pre-exist itself so as to then create itself.

2. Starting/creating/causing implies 'space'. Nothing happens if there is no place to happen. Without some pre-existing space, there can be no place to start/create/cause anything. Therefore it is logically impossible for space to pre-exist itself so as to then create itself.

3. Starting/creating/causing implies 'matter'. Nothing happens if there is no-things happening. Without some pre-existing matter, there is nothing to start/create/cause anything. Therefore it is logically impossible for matter to pre-exist itself so as to then create itself.

4. If the Universe is composed of time/space/matter, then the Universe cannot be started/created/caused. Therefore if the Universe exists, then it has ALWAYS EXISTED.
Last edited by RJG on October 10th, 2018, 2:59 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Karpel Tunnel
Posts: 948
Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by Karpel Tunnel »

devans99 wrote: October 10th, 2018, 10:44 am Actual Infinity does not exist. First just to remind the two types of infinity:

Potenial Infinity
Characterised by a repeating process, such as repeatedly adding to a number. These processes increases towards infinity without ever actually reaching it.

Actual Infinity
This is what most people think of when they say infinity; a non-finite number or quantity. Examples would be the actual existence of a completed infinite set or a physical property like length, mass taking on an infinite value.

Actual Infinity is impossible. I have numerous arguments:

Numerical Argument
- Assume Actual Infinity exists as a quantity
- Then there must be a quantity X such that X > all other quantities
- But X + 1 > X
- There is no such quantity
- Actual Infinity is not a quantity
That's still infinity. If the universe has always existed, then it has already existed for an infinite amount of time. Adding a second does not make something larger than infinity.
Materialistic Argument
- How exactly is Actual Infinity and the materialistic world view comparable?
- For example, can a physical quantity larger than any other possible physical quantity exist?
Well, that holds for a finite universe also, and it does not contitute an argument yet.

Geometrical Argument
- It is impossible to construct a line segment with the property that it is longer than all other line segments
The Measure Problem
- Assume time is eternal.
- If it can happen it will happen.
- An infinite number of times.
- No matter how unlikely it was in the first place!
- So all things happen an infinite number of times.
- So all things are equally likely.
- Reductio ad absurdum. Time is not eternal
Let's say your deduction is correct that things will repeat. You skipped the step where you demonstated that the universe cannot last forever and repeat.
The passage of time
- Time clearly passes
- Time cannot have started passing infinity long ago because there is no way to get to today.
If it is a block universe with time as the fourth dimension then today was always here. There are other solutions to this problem.
2nd Law of Thermodynamics
- If the universe has been around for ever then it should be in thermodynamic equilibrium by now.
- But the universe is not in thermodynamic equilibrium
if the universe had a starting point, that means that suddenly there was a wealth of non-equilibrium that has been following the second law since then. If that can happen once, it could happen, for all we know, again and again.
The Big Bang
- Looks suspiciously like the start of time
Except there is no consensus amongst cosmologists and astrophysicists that it was. There are a lot of hypotheses that place that Big Bang in a sequence, in a larger meta-universe, etc.
Paradoxes are solved
- Galileo's paradox is solved: There are less squares than numbers because not all numbers are squares. Yet each number has a square so the number of numbers and squares must be the same. He is trying to compare two actually infinite sets, IE comparing two undefined things. A set definition is not complete until all its members are iterated.
It's really odd you mention this one since it contradicts an earlier argument of yours since Cantor argued that infinite sets can be larger than each other.

Common sense View
- The Actually Infinite exists.
- Reductio ad absurdum.
This section seems on the incomplete side.
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

Karpel Tunnel wrote: October 10th, 2018, 2:33 pm That's still infinity. If the universe has always existed, then it has already existed for an infinite amount of time. Adding a second does not make something larger than infinity.
I demonstrated that actual infinity is not a mathematical quantity. Mathematics is a mirror of the real world; if maths cannot describe infinity, it probably does not occur in the real world.
Karpel Tunnel wrote: October 10th, 2018, 2:33 pm Let's say your deduction is correct that things will repeat. You skipped the step where you demonstated that the universe cannot last forever and repeat
I assumed that time was eternal (=universe lasts for ever within time) and then showed that the assumption leads to a contradiction. Proof by contradiction.

I do however think that time may be circular so everything repeats. Nature abhors macro-discontinuity so the shape of our universe may well be circular (a torus) with the time dimension running around the body and the space dimensions being within the circular cross sections. In this model, all the matter is neatly brought back together at the big crunch. The big bang immediately follows the big crunch. They are the same big bang and big crunch each time (same time co-ordinates). As Nietzsche foretold, we all live the same live over and over again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return

Karpel Tunnel wrote: October 10th, 2018, 2:33 pm if the universe had a starting point, that means that suddenly there was a wealth of non-equilibrium that has been following the second law since then. If that can happen once, it could happen, for all we know, again and again.
Yes but if the universe had existed for ever, it would spend 99.999...% of its time in heat death... so it would need a huge fluke for us to be here at all.

Karpel Tunnel wrote: October 10th, 2018, 2:33 pm Except there is no consensus amongst cosmologists and astrophysicists that it was. There are a lot of hypotheses that place that Big Bang in a sequence, in a larger meta-universe, etc.
We know time slows in the presence of gravity. The extreme gravity of the Big Bang would of brought time to an almost complete stop just after the big bang.
Karpel Tunnel wrote: October 10th, 2018, 2:33 pm It's really odd you mention this one since it contradicts an earlier argument of yours since Cantor argued that infinite sets can be larger than each other.
Cantor was on a religiously inspired quest to make a name for himself. He has not done maths or science any favours.
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

RJG wrote: October 10th, 2018, 1:51 pm
Devans99 wrote:Something which has no starting point cannot exist and is paradoxical as I demonstrated multiple times.
Why can't it exist? And where have you demonstrated it? I've only seen your references to an "infinite starting point", but not to a "NO starting point" (as in "always existing").
'No starting point' is the same as 'starts at infinity'. Infinity is just a label we use to mean unbounded. Everything I've said about infinity applies to a universe with no start.

RJG wrote: October 10th, 2018, 1:51 pm
Devans99 wrote:Give me an example of something without a start from the real world…
Circles have no starting point. Where is the beginning of a circle?
Time has no starting point. Where is the beginning of time?
Circles have a start point; its just arbitrary which point you select as a start. Circles are finite. You can't use time as an example because that is what we are debating (you can't prove time has no start).

So I'm still waiting for an example.

RJG wrote: October 10th, 2018, 1:51 pm
Devans99 wrote:Infinity is not a mathematical construct. Nether does it exist in the real world. Its just a flawed, contradictory concept. You were brainwashed just like me with this infinity stuff. I've got over it. Give me an example of Actual Infinity from the real world…
Devans, I don't necessarily disagree with you here, which is the reason I always avoid using this misleading/deceptive word. So with that said, can you make a case that "always existing" is impossible, and do so WITHOUT basing your arguments on (this deceptive word) "infinity"?

I've made multiple cases; you just need to realise 'infinite time' and 'always existing' are the same thing. One more example for you then; if the universe has always existed within time, what is the total number of particle collisions so far? It must be a number. Another paradox. Anything without a start is paradoxical.

RJG wrote:"The universe has ALWAYS EXISTED".
Devans99 wrote:Yes, but in the sense Einstein taught us about. You have to imagine all of space-time as a static block that has existed always and incorporates time. Why is this difficult? Do you disagree with Special Relativity? Nearly all scientists and philosophers buy it. Why do you not buy it?
You must see something that I don't. When I say "the universe has ALWAYS EXISTED", this is based on logic, (not science!) It is based wholly on the simplified logic that X can't exist before X exists, ...and not upon Einstein/Special Relativity/or anything else.
Time and change are different. Change is possible without time. For example the photon does not experience time yet its position and wavelength change. So there is not a logical problem with time being created in a timeless base reality. Base reality would have pre-existing space and matter from which our universe is created.

I agree the universe always existed but it must always exist outside time like Einstein said. If the universe always existed inside time then that would imply an actual infinity of time has passed so far; which is impossible.
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by RJG »

Devans99 wrote:'No starting point' is the same as 'starts at infinity'.
Not so. One has a starting point, and the other does not.

Devans99 wrote:Everything I've said about infinity applies to a universe with no start.
Not so. If you notice, your infinity arguments attack "starting points" (or fixed quantitative/specific comparative values), whereas "always existing" contains NO such starting points or specific values (to be attacked). Your comments such as "Assume Actual Infinity exists as a quantity" is non-sensical with respect to "always existing". It seems you are playing a strawman game, by focusing your arguments toward that which has a specific value or starting point, so as to then be attacked (argue its impossibility).

Instead of arguing for the impossibility of "infinity", can you pose an argument for the impossibility of "always existing"???

Devans99 wrote:Circles have a start point; its just arbitrary which point you select as a start.
I think this depends on definition. From my view, a starting point means there are no points before the starting point. If I arbitrarily pick a point on a circle, points still exist both CW and CCW of my arbitrary point. I could continually slide my finger along the (circumference of this) circle for-ev-ver and never get to the end, or I could go backwards and never ever find the starting point (that point where no more points exist).

Devans99 wrote:I've made multiple cases; you just need to realise 'infinite time' and 'always existing' are the same thing.
Not so. If these were the same thing, then you could pose an argument of the impossibility of 'always existing' without evoking a starting point or specific value (or other aspects that have no relevance to 'always existing').

Devans99 wrote:One more example for you then; if the universe has always existed within time, what is the total number of particle collisions so far? It must be a number. Another paradox. Anything without a start is paradoxical.
What makes this a paradox? Are you saying particles can't collide, because the number of collisions are incalculable?

Devans99 wrote:Change is possible without time.
Not so. I think you are confusing this with "simultaneous". As far as I know "instantaneous" (zero-time) change/motion is still not possible.

Devans99 wrote:So there is not a logical problem with time being created in a timeless base reality.
There's not? Doesn't causation/creation itself require time? If so, then where does this time come from to create time with?

Devans99 wrote:If the universe always existed inside time then that would imply an actual infinity of time has passed so far; which is impossible.
The word "infinity" is the problem/confusion. "Cut infinity in two and each 'half' is still infinite." --- Karpal
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

RJG wrote: October 11th, 2018, 4:27 am
Devans99 wrote:'No starting point' is the same as 'starts at infinity'.
Not so. One has a starting point, and the other does not.
Actual Infinity extends for ever; it has no starting point. An always existing universe is modelled with time going to -infinity. That does not make it a starting point though; its just a label; time extends back for ever.
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by RJG »

Devans99 wrote:'No starting point' is the same as 'starts at infinity'.
Disagree. ...there is no "start" whatsoever in "always existing"; or in true 'infinity'. This false equivalency is the source of your logical errors.

Devans99 wrote:Actual Infinity extends forever; it has no starting point.
Agreed, ...which thusly defeats all your 'the impossibility of infinity' arguments (those that rely on your 'finite' values/representations).

There are no 'finite' values: no "starting" or ending points whatsoever in "always existing" (true infinity). Your arguments attack these ficticious/non-existent 'finite' values, which thusly result in flawed conclusions. In essence, your arguments attack 'apples' to conclude 'no oranges'.

Again, if you replace "always existing" (no finite values) with your "infinity" (with finite values) in your arguments, then all your
arguments fall apart.

If we use "always existing" in lieu of "infinity", then all our confusion (and logical errors) disappear.

If the universe exists, then it has ALWAYS EXISTED.

...the End.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6038
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by Consul »

RJG wrote: October 12th, 2018, 8:58 am If the universe exists, then it has ALWAYS EXISTED.
...the End.
This is true if the universe encompasses all places and times, in which case there is and can be no time when it doesn't exist. Then, the temporal relations before and after aren't applicable to the universe as a whole, because there aren't and can't be any pre-time or post-time times. Sentences such as "Before the universe existed there was nothing" are then self-contradictory, because they imply that there was a time when there was no time.

However, to say (truly) that the universe has always existed is not to say that the universe qua spacetime is temporally infinite, because the former is true even if the past is not infinite.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

RJG wrote: October 12th, 2018, 8:58 am Again, if you replace "always existing" (no finite values) with your "infinity" (with finite values) in your arguments, then all your
arguments fall apart.
Well ok, heres one with "always existing" as you have asked:

- Say you meet an always existing being in your always existing universe
- You notice he is counting
- You ask and he says ‘I’ve always been counting’
- What number is he on?

Still a paradox I feel. Same for all the others examples I gave.

RJG wrote: October 12th, 2018, 8:58 am If the universe exists, then it has ALWAYS EXISTED.
But not within time; that would mean the universe had no beginning; which means its could not exist. Everything has a start (still waiting for a counter example).

The universe exists as Einstein said as a static 4D block incorporating time.

Time always existing would mean endless chains of cause and effect stretching back in time. But the chains go on for ever and have no start; they cannot exist.

Is there a reason why you are so keen on Presentism? Kinda going out of style since Special Relativity...
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by RJG »

RJG wrote:If the universe exists, then it has ALWAYS EXISTED.
Consul wrote:However, to say (truly) that the universe has always existed is not to say that the universe qua spacetime is temporally infinite, because the former is true even if the past is not infinite.
Consul, when I say "always", I mean more than just the temporal aspect of it. I mean the 'certainty' of it, ...i.e. beyond any temporal limits.

P1. The universe exists.
P2. Either the universe was created or it was NOT-created.
P3. It is logically impossible for the universe to be created.
C1. Therefore, the universe was NOT-created.
C2. Therefore, since the universe exists, it has ALWAYS EXISTED.

Devans99 wrote:Well ok, heres one with "always existing" as you have asked:

- Say you meet an always existing being in your always existing universe
- You notice he is counting
- You ask and he says ‘I’ve always been counting’
- What number is he on?

Still a paradox I feel. Same for all the others examples I gave.
There are NO starting points in "always existing". Therefore this "always existing being" is a bald faced liar. He could not have "always been counting" because there would be NO "starting point" for him to start his count (no point that was at "0" or "1"). He can't possibly claim to have "always been counting" if he never 'started' the action of counting. Any counting action would be a 'finite' action within the infinite "always existing" universe.

Devans99 wrote:Time always existing would mean endless chains of cause and effect stretching back in time. But the chains go on for ever and have no start; they cannot exist.
Why would endless time mean endless causal chains? Causation has no (zero) effect on time. Time can occur without causation, but causation can't occur without time.

RJG wrote:If the universe exists, then it has ALWAYS EXISTED.
devans99 wrote:...that would mean the universe had no beginning…
Agreed.
devans99 wrote: ...which means it could not exist.
Not so. The universe certainly exists.
devans99 wrote: Everything has a start…
Not so. Not the universe. It is logically impossible for our universe to have been started, caused, or created. Time (and space/matter) cannot exist prior to its own existence. X<X is not logically possible.
Last edited by RJG on October 12th, 2018, 4:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

RJG wrote: October 12th, 2018, 4:05 pm
Devans99 wrote:Well ok, heres one with "always existing" as you have asked:

- Say you meet an always existing being in your always existing universe
- You notice he is counting
- You ask and he says ‘I’ve always been counting’
- What number is he on?

Still a paradox I feel. Same for all the others examples I gave.
There are NO starting points in "always existing". Therefore this "always existing being" is a bald faced liar. He could not have "always been counting" because there would be NO "starting point" for him to start his count (no point that was at "0" or "1"). He can't possibly claim to have "always been counting" if he never 'started' the action of counting. Any counting action would be a 'finite' action within the infinite "always existing" universe.
Its a thought experiment and he is telling the truth. You are just having problems excepting that things without a start are paradoxical I think.

RJG wrote: October 12th, 2018, 4:05 pm
Devans99 wrote:Time always existing would mean endless chains of cause and effect stretching back in time. But the chains go on for ever and have no start; they cannot exist.
Why would endless time mean endless causal chains? Causation has no (zero) effect on time. Time can occur without causation, but causation can't occur without time.
If you are a determinist then all of reality is just cause and effect. One version of the prime mover says you can trace these chains of cause and effect back to an original 'uncaused cause'; IE God. Whether you believe that or not; the alternative of non-terminating chains of cause and effect is unacceptable; those chains would have no start so they could not exist.
devans99
Posts: 341
Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm

Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?

Post by devans99 »

devans99 wrote: October 12th, 2018, 4:53 pm
RJG wrote: October 12th, 2018, 4:05 pm
There are NO starting points in "always existing". Therefore this "always existing being" is a bald faced liar. He could not have "always been counting" because there would be NO "starting point" for him to start his count (no point that was at "0" or "1"). He can't possibly claim to have "always been counting" if he never 'started' the action of counting. Any counting action would be a 'finite' action within the infinite "always existing" universe.
Its a thought experiment and he is telling the truth. You are just having problems excepting that things without a start are paradoxical I think.
BTW, the answer to the paradox is that no such being could exist because 'always existing in time' is impossible.

Do you not see that your insistence on 'no starting point' means that our universe could not exist at all?
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021