• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Infinite time and space.

shawn001

shawn001

Well-Known Member
George Smoot: The design of the universe

At Serious Play 2008, astrophysicist George Smoot shows stunning new images from deep-space surveys, and prods us to ponder how the cosmos -- with its giant webs of dark matter and mysterious gaping voids -- got built this way.


[youtube]c64Aia4XE1Y[/youtube]
George Smoot: The design of the universe - YouTube
 
jasonwill2

jasonwill2

Well-Known Member
thread hop:

Lets all use our common sense here, it has not been disproven that there is infinite time and space,
Click to expand...
When the original poster said that infinite time and space... I wanted to grind my teeth. Technically, under currently accepted theories, time is infinite in at least one direction, but as for space, it is not.

Even with a current multi-verse model space is insanely huge, but still finite. I find the idea of infinite space, well, stupid. That would mean there is infinite matter and infinite energy UNLESS all the finite matter in existence is in one area, but then there is an area infinitely empty and forever going on space with nothing in it.

It seems to me that over 15 billion years that we have limited space, but theoretically infinite time. Though given how time is dependent on space, the only way we would get infinite time is for a cold freeze death of the Universe.

It could just be that we got lucky, OR, that some unseen intelligence guided the conditions and evolution of our specices. However I doubt such a thing would be a monotheistic god.
 
S

swamplizard

Human
Photonic said:
Ok, let me clear up some misconceptions.

One: 1 is imaginary when attempting to quantify something that has nothing to be compared to, 1 has nothing to represent, therefore it is 1 divided by zero. Zero isn't an actual number, but a lack of numbers. The problem here is it is more like undefined. Because it would be 1 divided by 0.

As we both know, division by zero is undefined no?


Which is why if you try to quantify time prior to the big bang, you simply end up with undefined. The multiverse theory is sometimes used to attempt to quantify spacetime prior to the big bang, by associating a common constant, this allows for representation in our own universe to quantify a mathematical model.

Also, I want to clear up one more thing. A vacuum in space is not empty, a vacuum cannot exist outside of 3(+)-space.
Click to expand...

Hi Photonic,

You are closer to what I've been saying all along. zero does not exist, so yes, in traditional mathematics, dividing by zero is "undefined." There are those that state if one follows the increase in quotient by the decrease in divisor, then the result of dividing by zero would be infinity. Then there are those wackos, such as myself that state that dividing by zero, if it were possible would result in 1. Anyway, consider the following interesting mathematical "certainties:" x^0=1; 1^x=1. Mathematics is a conceptual device, that is all, it is a simulation of finite reality, which is a contradiction of terms within itself. It is useful at the marketplace and the study of various scientific endeavors, but metaphysically is only illusion. 1 means being, zero means not being and thus does not exist. All that is, is of 1. It is its own representative and needs no other.

I have enjoyed the conversation, though I admit that this thread has grown tremendously since I last engaged and I haven't taken the time to ramble through it, though I did ramble on a bit, I suppose. :eek:

best regards,
swampy
 
camanintx

camanintx

Well-Known Member
muhammad_isa said:
Oh yes they do! They wouldn't be "your past" otherwise, they'd be "wiped out" .. cease to exist :yes:
Click to expand...
You shouldn't confuse the effects of an event with the event itself. If I travel far enough out into space, I can watch live TV broadcasts of men standing on the moon but you wouldn't suggest that is evidence that men are still on the moon would you?

The fact that you can't tell me everything you have seen, heard, tasted, smelled and felt should tell you that those events no longer exist. Even if you could, it would only mean that you have a really good memory.
 
muhammad_isa

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
camanintx said:
The fact that you can't tell me everything you have seen, heard, tasted, smelled and felt should tell you that those events no longer exist. Even if you could, it would only mean that you have a really good memory.
Click to expand...

Time is just a perception .. we perceive it as flowing from 'past to future'.
I know what you mean, when you say "the event no longer exists", but in a meaningful context, it does!
What do I mean by 'meaningful'? I mean that it HAPPENED, and therefore is part of reality .. our perception of time is not absolute .. it has to be relative to SOMETHING.

We perceive that 'will happen' and 'has happened' are apparently absolute .. in an 'Einsteinian model', they are not!
 
camanintx

camanintx

Well-Known Member
muhammad_isa said:
Time is just a perception .. we perceive it as flowing from 'past to future'.
Click to expand...
I agree that time is just a perception but I don't think we agree on what what is being perceived.

I know what you mean, when you say "the event no longer exists", but in a meaningful context, it does!
What do I mean by 'meaningful'? I mean that it HAPPENED, and therefore is part of reality .. our perception of time is not absolute .. it has to be relative to SOMETHING.

We perceive that 'will happen' and 'has happened' are apparently absolute .. in an 'Einsteinian model', they are not!
Click to expand...
While you say that something that happened in the past "is" a part of reality, I would say that it "was" a part of reality. You see reality as a continuum with "now" a thin slice of it at a given moment, like viewing scenery from a train window with events appearing out of the future and then receding into the past. That would imply that the future is predetermined and can be known before it happens, something which has never been observed.

Instead I see reality as a single moment perpetually changing, the future nothing more than a probability while the past only a memory. A good illustration would be those LED message sticks you may have seen in stores. While we see the whole message when viewing them in action, in reality they are only a line of lights incapable of displaying the entire message at any given instant. It is only our memory of the sequence of changing lights that allows us to perceive the message.
 
Kilgore Trout

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
The Sum of Awe said:
No, I'm saying if time doesn't exist in a place, everything that happens would happen at once; death, birth, midlife. So the universe wouldn't have kept expanding, it should've died by now.
Click to expand...

If you're sincerely interested in learning then try opening a *********** book and actually obtaining some knowledge on the subject. Otherwise, stop acting like an effing infant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top