It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mikromarius
Originally posted by lilblam
But we can NEVER have eternity behind us in the PAST, because that means we had to go through eternity to get WHERE WE ARE NOW.
Not so. Atleast not the way I see it. I have a couple of examples or theories, call it what you want. We have always discribed time through geometry, movement and a way to systemise. It's math. It's a tool for explaining what is infact unexplainable. We use symbols to define something which is invisible and untouchable. Try to look uppon time as a circle. Any point on that circle is a beginning and an end, a point which sums up eternity. Whether you call that point now, then or when is really not relevant. But my point is this: No matter where you stand in the circle of time, eternity is both ahead of you and behind you, for the Now is the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. But eternity is relative if you speek of time as something absolute, like you just did when you called a span of time absolute. Eternity is relative to time just like a period is relative to time as a whole: an rather absolute and infact relative eternity. If eternity wasn't absolute in some aspects we simply wouldn't exist at all. For time is movement, developement, evolution, generation, degeneration and regeneration. Time exists. It's the type of eternity. The antitype of non-existance. It's what reminds us that we exist, if only for a short period of time. Each time. The same time. Anytime.......
Blessings,
Mikromarius
Originally posted by mikromarius
Originally posted by lilblam
But we can NEVER have eternity behind us in the PAST, because that means we had to go through eternity to get WHERE WE ARE NOW.
Not so. Atleast not the way I see it. I have a couple of examples or theories, call it what you want. We have always discribed time through geometry, movement and a way to systemise. It's math. It's a tool for explaining what is infact unexplainable. We use symbols to define something which is invisible and untouchable. Try to look uppon time as a circle. Any point on that circle is a beginning and an end, a point which sums up eternity. Whether you call that point now, then or when is really not relevant. But my point is this: No matter where you stand in the circle of time, eternity is both ahead of you and behind you, for the Now is the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. But eternity is relative if you speek of time as something absolute, like you just did when you called a span of time absolute. Eternity is relative to time just like a period is relative to time as a whole: an rather absolute and infact relative eternity. If eternity wasn't absolute in some aspects we simply wouldn't exist at all. For time is movement, developement, evolution, generation, degeneration and regeneration. Time exists. It's the type of eternity. The antitype of non-existance. It's what reminds us that we exist, if only for a short period of time. Each time. The same time. Anytime.......
Blessings,
Mikromarius
Originally posted by amantine
I mainly have a problem with the premis that says that there has been an infinity before us. This premis is empirically disproven. There is much evidence that suggests that the universe started with the Big Bang. We don't and can't know how (after the first 10^-43 second we know, but before that is a mystery) and why the Big Bang happened. It just did. I always like to look at it as Aristotle's unmoved mover. The thing that caused everything else without being caused itself.
The energy was created then, because with the Big Bang the rules for nature where created. One of those rules is that energy doesn't get destroyed or created.
Personally, I think time exists, but that there is no absolute time, only relative time. I think all processes are dynamic, they depend on change to exist. I agree with Heraclitus on this: "On those stepping into rivers staying the same other and other waters flow."
Originally posted by Eternal
So, before ANYTHING would ever be formed out of energy, energy would first WAIT FOREVER (NEVER STOP WAITING) before shaping ANTHING.
If energy waited forever than wouldn't it still be waiting? After all it was you who said that forever is never stop waiting.
But i have to say your agrument is very interesting and it makes you think.
[Edited on 21-1-2004 by Eternal]
Originally posted by Merkeva
Im not too sure on this but it is possible to get some thing out of nothing ever heard of the cashmier effect? or zero point enegry? Also quantam physics has shown that particals at the sub atomic level can borrow enegry from know where...can anyone back this up?
There was a young lady named Bright,
Who travelled much faster than light
She started one day
In a relative way,
And returned on the previous night
Originally posted by lilblam
But you must admit, that Big Bang could not come out of nothing. Nothing doesn't have the RESOURCES needed to create a universe, or blow up for that matter. So Big Bang had to come out of something. It had no choice! If you had NOTHING, you cannot have it blow up into a universe. It means at least SOMETHING was there, and that means something was ALWAYS there. But that also goes right into my theory that if that's true, we cannot be here because infinity cannot be surpassed. Sooo time must not exist!
Does that make sense? I understand your point about the Big Bang, but do you see how it can't "bang" out of nothingness?
Originally posted by Viendin
lilblam, I said it before, and I say it again.
This is not a question of the existence of time, this is a question of the existence of god.
You calmly 'remove' god from the equation and you're given wonderfully simple results, time doesn't exist!
Drop Quantum Mechanics. We don't need them, they get Special Relativity all messy anyway, oooh, nice results.. but, wait. I can see that we're WAY off whenever we're calculating things less than 1,000 tonnes.. erhm... Maybe I should just drop Relativity, I can do it with Quantum Mechanics.. It shouldn't be that.. wait.. that's not what the earth weighs, or how it moves! Damn! Foiled again!
In Lamence:
g + e = t
God and Existence create Time. In any case, a lack of god requires infinite existence, existence has always existed in this case, therefore there is zero time, we can express this through
g + Inf = t, Inf - g = Inf, Thus g = 0, It may as well. therefore Inf = t, time is infinite and thus doesn't really exist.. uh, because we don't really 'get' infinity.
if g is set to infinity, then existence is allowed, in fact, any values of existence can work with any values of god, infinite existence can even work with a god, but we now have 3 unsolvable variables, and nothing to substitute with!
g + e = t
t - g = e
t - e = g
Ignoring god is nice, but in situations like this, where god is truly an unquestionably present variable that we cannot account for, we cannot simply ignore it and draw conclusions!
Also as previously stated, in any event, the possible fact that time is infinite does not mean that time is an illusion or does not exist. 1/Infinity is technically nothing, but there are infinite integers and 1 is still sitting there! Just like there could be infinite time but a second still passes, a minute still ticks by, and we, stuck in our finite minds in our finite lands with our finite lives, who cannot comprehend more than the notion of infinity, are forced to go the way of the schoolchild through an infinite diverging series!
1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13+14+15 ... does not equal infinity for humanity. We cannot just jump to 'the end' and say, ohp, infinity! We have to add it up.
1, 3, 6, 10, 15, 21, 28, 36, 45, 55, 66, 78, 81, 95, 110, ...
We are doomed to travel this way, and while speculation about a four dimensional being's thoughts on the subject are nice, that on its own is as questionable as god's existence, there might not be four dimensional beings looking down at us, laughing at our meagre concepts of time and space, and 'infinity', there might be, if you say you can assume there are and use it to help your theory, you must accept the fact of god's place in your 'conclusions', and you must see the major hole in your theory!
This is far from irrefutable, lilblam.
EDIT: Oh, and LAX, time is useful for a hell of a lot more than forcing you to lift your sorry ass out of bed each day to get to work or school, and a lot more than to get to a date on 'time', it isn't fake or fluffy, and it isn't a concept of man. It is something which through anthropological theory, must exist in a life supporting three dimensional universe. It is all-important. Time is Rule.
[Edited on 21-1-2004 by Viendin]
Originally posted by MrJingles
I agree that time has to exist. But if no human can grasp infinity does it really exist? think of it the same way as, if a tree falls down in the middle of a forest and nobody is around, does it make a sound?
That means that if god does exist and he believes in infinity then it exists, but since we created god, that means we also created infinity. But if god created the universe then who created god?
The universe? Oh wait, that hasn't existed yet. It's like the chicken and the egg. Except, god would have the 4th dimension on his side and could go back before the universe and blah...
It gets confusing after a while and you come to the conclusion that god cannot have created the universe becuase nothing could have created him. So there you have it, god could not have created the universe or time for that matter.
Eventually you come to the only conclusion, excluding god as creator, that the universe has always been here, and there has never been nothing.
Originally posted by amantine
Originally posted by lilblam
But you must admit, that Big Bang could not come out of nothing. Nothing doesn't have the RESOURCES needed to create a universe, or blow up for that matter. So Big Bang had to come out of something. It had no choice! If you had NOTHING, you cannot have it blow up into a universe. It means at least SOMETHING was there, and that means something was ALWAYS there. But that also goes right into my theory that if that's true, we cannot be here because infinity cannot be surpassed. Sooo time must not exist!
Does that make sense? I understand your point about the Big Bang, but do you see how it can't "bang" out of nothingness?
At t=0, spacetime itself is singular. The problem is that we don't know what happens then. There might be a process that we don't know that started the Big Bang. We can't say anything about what was before the Big Bang (if there was a before), because there is no information. All we know is that it did happen and apparently something can happen from nothing, although nothing is not the right word. Nothing usually means there is no thing in empty space. There wasn't even spacetime itself as far as we know. The 'nothing' didn't exist. It's more like something came, instead of something came from nothing. Just like Aristotle's unmoved mover.
The problem with your argument is that your theory is empirically untrue, for everything we see time happens. An explanantion of the universe without time would be really strange.
Originally posted by Viendin
Jingles: A tree falling in the woods. For one, trees are living, aware beings. This has been proven several times. If you chop up a living cabbage in one room, and have an electrometer, or whatever those liedetectory things are hooked up to another one, in another room, then it'll go nuts. Then, if you send a series of people through the room, it'll behave normally for every one except you, the one who killed the other cabbage.
Apart from that, a 2 tonne plus object crashing to the forest floor would not be particularly heard by anyone, but that does not ruin its existence. It still sends a massive shockwave of air through the forest, blowing other small plants, moving and crushing things it hits as it falls, the soundwave itself sure as hell does exist, we just don't hear it. And I know, that ruins the question. And I know, that isn't what it means. It is a question of existence without consciousness, a debate I am taking part in in many places at the present.
Just the same though, infinity exists. We can keep making larger numbers, an infinity of them. We can keep making smaller ones, an infinity of those too. We have an infinite number of decimals in between any two of the infinite number of positive or negative integers. We might not be able to write out an infinity, but we sure as hell know that there is an infinity of a lot of things.
Right, and I didn't really get how you came to your conclusion that we created god..
God Creates Universe> Universe Creates Man > ?
Here's the nicker, this is a tree in the woods deal, if our consciousness is all that really causes existence, then yes, we created god and the universe, hence we are the real gods, and it is a cycle, but if our consciousness is not what created everything, then god made the universe, it made us, and we made pop'n'fresh.
errrrh, right, SCIENCE EXAM TIME!!!
Originally posted by quintar
Let me ask this then, and I hope I word it correctly.
If time is an illusion, does that mean that I can be 'faster' than other people?
for example, a minute for me would be an hour for someone else?
if there is no time, then wouldn't it mean that there are no boundaries? meaning anyone can be as 'fast' as they want to be?
like, an example would be like the Matrix.. when Neo realizes that it's not 'air' that he's breathing, he pushes the boundaries.
This is a great topic BTW.
Originally posted by lilblam
Well first of all, nothing is NOT empty space. Space is something! Nothing just means ZERO = 0. Can you multiply/divide do anything to 0 to get any other number? All you can do is ADD something (but that means it comes from somewhere else, which WAS always something). So if there was ONLY 0 and NO OTHER NUMBERS, could you suddenly get a whole friggin universe out of 0? No... and sorry to bring math into this, but maybe that'll make more sense.
Now, I'm not saying we ever knew WHAT was before the Big Bang, but we can be pretty damn sure it was not absolutely NOTHING or 0. Plz don't get tripped up on the meaning of words, nothing doesn't imply or usually mean anything... it's just nothing. Space is something! Light it something! Energy is something! Consciousness is something! Thought it something!
And when you said "something came" instead of "something came from nothing", that's exactly the same thing. Something comes from either of 2 things: Nothing, or Something. Since it cannot come from nothing, it has to be something. Unless, it NEVER came out of anything, and time doesn't exist at all. That means whatever is, always was, always is, always will be.
My thery is observationally false. We observe, experience, and live in a world that seems to be closely linked with time. It all flows in seemingly one direction, from future into the past. But such is OUR perception.
As someone else on this thread has mentioned, pretend time is a circle. We are going around on that circle and can only see the spot of the circle we're on. But someone else can look at the whole circle, and see everything on it at the same time. We're like a rollercoaster... can only sit on that big thing and go where it goes, but people from the ground can see the entire track in front of us and before us.
There is NO such thing as time!
You forgot one little part - so who made God? If he ALWAYS existed, then he'd never make us if time does exist, it'd take him eternity before he decided to make anything. Unless God is timeless, which means time does NOT exist! And if he is timeless, he cannot CREATE anything because if time doesn't exist, there is no such thing as Creation. There is only being. If something "comes into being" and time doesn't exist, then that thing ALWAYS WAS.
If he ALWAYS existed, then he'd never make us
if time does exist, it'd take him eternity before he decided to make anything.
Unless God is timeless, which means time does NOT exist! And if he is timeless, he cannot CREATE anything because if time doesn't exist, there is no such thing as Creation.