This is not so. Let me remind you that virtually all modern scientists and philosophers believe that the universe had a beginning a finite time ago specifically because of this problem.
The evidence we have of a universe with a finite past is that the universe appears to be expanding, and so would logically collapse to a single point some time in the past. However, we
also know that our current theories of physics do not accurately describe the very hot and dense stuff that appeared when the universe was very small. Therefore, a finite past is a stupendously well thought out and well-educated guess, not immutable fact. There are many other ways to explain why the universe looks the way it does, and a lot of them don't have beginnings.
If you disagree, feel free to earn your Nobel prize for the complete theory of gravity you have.
If you froze this current second and looked backwards they would stretch infinitely backwards. There would be infinite seconds of that time live. It is quite absolutely impossible to cross that infinite number of seconds. There is no end to them. In fact if you can cross them then you could count them and that makes them finite.
I can count the integers. How many are there?
It is philosophical nonsense to suggest you can cross an infinite distance or number of things. If you could they would be finite. It just can't happen.
So what other answer is there to, "If I walk for at a finite speed for an infinite amount of time, how far do I go?"
The first part is correct. There is no known mathematical reason that energy can be created or destroyed.
"physics is the same no matter what time it is" is synonymous with "Inductive logic works." Since everything humans have ever reasoned about relies on inductive logic,
Ergo, energy is conserved or nonsense ensues.
Mathematics is a tiny sliver of reality
Mathematics is a superset of reality. The universe
will conform to mathematical results - but mathematics can reason about universes that aren't what is.
Physics does depend on the size of the physical object considered. One type of physics applies to large objects (Newtonian physics) and another to small things (quantum physics). The great search is for a unified theory but we have none as of yet.
Quantum mechanics applies to all objects, except those smaller/hotter than a certain size/temperature. (The only such objects I know of are the singularities involved in black holes and the big bang, and the high energies of modern particle accelerators.) Newtonian physics is merely what quantum tells us happens to large, slow-moving, cool objects.
My claim did not mention light.
Quantum mechanical effects can appear to travel faster than light, and so do weird things to causality.
If energy has always been there: 1. It would have already reached maximum dispersion. 2. It would have had an infinite amount of fulgurations and therefore time (duration) and that is not possible.
Except, as mentioned, energy can spontaneously rearrange itself, so 1 doesn't apply.
By the way I do not consider quantum physics at this time to be a well established or understood field. We are still tweeking Newtonian physics, I take nothing as concrete, in quantum theory.
Quantum mechanics is the most well-tested and accurate theory in history, more so than even Newtonian physics.
What? If it takes trillions of years and the human race is less than .00000000000001% of that then how is that verified?
because quantum mechanics tells us so. See above.
(Also, it's quite a lot less than that number.)
Thermodynamics is a descriptive law not a prescriptive one.
So you agree with me!
Even if it could be reversed which it can't that would still not mean time ran backwards. The concept doesn't even make sense. Time is basically duration. Nothing has a negative duration. If it has a duration equal to or less than zero then it has no duration.
The only reason that time flows one way but not the other is thermodynamics. If you got rid of, or reversed it, then time would flow backwards, as much as it made sense to define time at all.