The first cause argument

[Polymath257]

So one infinity past, and another infinity in the future, two infinities or one infinity?

If you double an infinite quantity, you get something of the same size.

There are two sets, both are infinite. if you take their union, you have another infinite set.

Since of course you being a mathematical guru know very well there cannot be two but one, it is an absurd proposition.

Quite the contrary, I know that there are infinitely many disjoint infinite sets.

Here is an example:
look at all powers of 2: So, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, .... (double each time)
now look at all powers of 3: So 3, 9, 27, 81, 243 ... (triple each time)
then look at all powers of 5: so, 5, 25, 125, 625, 3125, ....

You can do this for every prime number (2, 3, and 5 are prime).

Each prime gives an infinite set. There are infinite many primes. And none of those sets overlaps with any of the others.

An ordered set cannot be used to blindly or dogmatically cover up a finite temporal regress. You know it.

You are assuming the temporal process is finite. I disagree with that assumption.

 

[firedragon]

If you double an infinite quantity, you get something of the same size.

Really? Can you even double an infinite quantity? Thats a hilarious thought. See the desperation in your need to protect your "we" group?

Think about it. Can you complete an infinite number of things or lets say assignments within a finite time until today, and another infinite number of assignments from today to another set day of analysis in the future, which are two finite time periods, and go on an infinite number of analysis periods which are all individually finite with an infinite number of assignments within those finite time periods?

Please demonstrate how that is possible.

 

[Polymath257]

Really? Can you even double an infinite quantity? Thats a hilarious thought. See the desperation in your need to protect your "we" group?

Yes, absolutely, it looks to me like you don't know the basics about infinite sets.

If you ask, I can explain.

Think about it. Can you complete an infinite number of things or lets say assignments within a finite time until today, and another infinite number of assignments from today to another set day of analysis in the future, which are two finite time periods, and go on an infinite number of analysis periods which are all individually finite with an infinite number of assignments within those finite time periods?

Please demonstrate how that is possible.

Who said anything about finite time periods? both the past and the future are infinite in this scenario.

I would note that saying something is 'hilarious' or 'absurd' is not an argument if there is no actual contradiction.

 

[ratiocinator]

An infinite regress is generally argued because the belief that causes are infinitely dependent on dependent causes; it is impossible to arrive at a first principle or cause. right? This in philosophy is called Homunculus. This fallacy creates an endless loop that actually explains nothing. It is fallacious reasoning to accept any explanation that creates this kind of endless loop.

There's a big difference between principle and cause. There is no loop in an infinite past and no loop of explanation. It just applies the principle of causality. Neither an infinite past nor a first cause actually explains causality so the homunculus fallacy simply doesn't apply. An infinite past is a perfectly logically self-consistent notion that is easily modelled mathematically.

Lets say all kinds of beings have an infinite number of causes that never ends in the past, and it will never end in the future, today is an analysis day, and at this moment, that ad infinitum has ended right now, and the next moment is the beginning of another at infinitum, that means there is a beginning and and end to this, which means the proposition of an ad infinitum past or future is fallacious right now.

That doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. 'Now' would be just a point on an infinity long 'line'.

When you refer to an infinite, do you refer to a true or possible? An original true infinite set of integers has a proper subset of even numbers which has an equivalent number of members as the original true infinite set.

I mean true infinite, and yes, what you said is right about the set of even numbers being the same size as the set of integers, so what? The set of real numbers is actually a larger infinity, so if time is a continuum, then it's a larger infinity than the set of integers.

Thus, the infinity in its case is finite. If you wish to pursue it, it is a contradiction.

You haven't shown a contradiction with a real infinite past.

 

[firedragon]

Yes, absolutely, it looks to me like you don't know the basics about infinite sets.

Ah. Another attempt at being God.

Mate. You cannot double infinity. Or triple, or multiple by a billion. A child knows that. It is only a formulate multiplication, but not existent. Thats why you got so touchy when I asked your "we" group the division of zero.

You never answered your defence of "all toasters are made of Gold" though you dived into a defence of your "we" group. Do you realise your infinite intention?

A cat, crossing a dune in shorter intervals at infinitum, is a fantasy, though you can give it a mathematical equation. Its nonsensical. But, a 10th grade student can give it an equation.

I don't see why it is impossible

Lol. Thats a good cut and paste answer. "I don't see why it is impossible". What ever anyone says just cut and paste this: "I don't see why it is impossible".

A toad can jump zigzag, ad infinitum, progressively longer in intervals, across the world, within a finite time period, a multiple finite time periods, and is that possible?

Your apologetic answer "I don't see why it is impossible".

Awesome.

 

[Polymath257]

Lets say all kinds of beings have an infinite number of causes that never ends in the past, and it will never end in the future, today is an analysis day, and at this moment, that ad infinitum has ended right now, and the next moment is the beginning of another at infinitum, that means there is a beginning and and end to this,

Yes.

which means the proposition of an ad infinitum past or future is fallacious right now.

No fallacy given.

When you refer to an infinite, do you refer to a true or possible?

Actual infinity, true infinity.

An original true infinite set of integers has a proper subset of even numbers which has an equivalent number of members as the original true infinite set.

Yes, they have the same cardinality.

So a true infinite is thought of as a determinate whole with an infinite number of members, different to a possible infinite which never gets to an infinity, although it increases forever.

Yes. No contradiction yet.

At any given time, as in right now, a possibility of an infinite is actually finite.[/QUOT Done. Its over. Thus, the infinity in its case is finite. If you wish to pursue it, it is a contradiction. Just a tad bit for you.

 

[night912]

If you do understand that first cannot be second, you will understand the contradiction.

Again.

1st is not 2nd.

If you understand that "a cause" does not mean that it's the first cause, then you will understand that what I said is not a contradiction. You will also understand that your argument says nothing about a first cause.

Again, a cause does not mean that it's the 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc cause.

If you understood your own argument then you would have addressed my point that I made regarding your argument instead of claiming that what I said was contradictory. There wouldn't be a need for you to assert that I don't understand something that's irrelevant to my point.

So go ahead and try again, keeping in mind not to make claims without a logical explanation to justify your claim and/or using a strawman.

 

[firedragon]

There's a big difference between principle and cause. There is no loop in an infinite past and no loop of explanation. It just applies the principle of causality. Neither an infinite past nor a first cause actually explains causality so the homunculus fallacy simply doesn't apply. An infinite past is a perfectly logically self-consistent notion that is easily modelled mathematically.

Please do show the mathematical model to lets say a man crossing this time period, from today till past, and from today to future, ad infinitum.

Lets see what you come up with.

Thanks.

 

[firedragon]

If you understand that "a cause" does not mean that it's the first cause,

If you read the OP, you will see the argument.

Thanks.

 

[Polymath257]

Lets say all kinds of beings have an infinite number of causes that never ends in the past, and it will never end in the future, today is an analysis day, and at this moment, that ad infinitum has ended right now, and the next moment is the beginning of another at infinitum, that means there is a beginning and and end to this,

Yes.

which means the proposition of an ad infinitum past or future is fallacious right now.

What is the fallacy? Oh, you think that infinite sets can't be bounded. That is where you are wrong.

When you refer to an infinite, do you refer to a true or possible?

I use the term 'actual infinity', but it is the same as your 'true infinity'. Yes, actual infinity.

An original true infinite set of integers has a proper subset of even numbers which has an equivalent number of members as the original true infinite set.

Yes. They have the same cardinality.

So a true infinite is thought of as a determinate whole with an infinite number of members, different to a possible infinite which never gets to an infinity, although it increases forever.

What do you mean 'never gets to infinity'? Sets are not processes. They are completed wholes.

Both the set of natural numbers and the set of even numbers are infinite. They have the same, infinite, cardinality.

So?

At any given time, as in right now, a possibility of an infinite is actually finite.

No, it is NOT 'actually finite'. It is actually infinite.

Done. Its over. Thus, the infinity in its case is finite. If you wish to pursue it, it is a contradiction. Just a tad bit for you.

No, the infinity is not finite. You didn't give a contradiction, but merely showed you don't understand the basics.

 

[Polymath257]

Please do show the mathematical model to lets say a man crossing this time period, from today till past, and from today to future, ad infinitum.

Lets see what you come up with.

Thanks.

The collection of positive and negative integers. With any particular integer as the present, all integers below it represent an infinite past and all integers above itrepresent an infinite future.

At each second of time, the man goes from the integer he is on to the next one.

So, if the man is on -12391 right now, he will be on -12390 in one second, and at 0 a bit over 3 hours later, etc.

Easy, almost trivial, mathematical model.

 

[firedragon]

So, if the man is on -12391 right now

A minus integer. Today? Lol. Just think about it.

 

[Polymath257]

Ah. Another attempt at being God.

Mate. You cannot double infinity. Or triple, or multiple by a billion. A child knows that. It is only a formulate multiplication, but not existent. Thats why you got so touchy when I asked your "we" group the division of zero.

Yes, we can and do multiply infinities. If you double an infinite quantity, you get the same quantity. If you multiply by any finite quantity, you again get that same infinite quantity.

No contradiction.

You never answered your defence of "all toasters are made of Gold" though you dived into a defence of your "we" group. Do you realise your infinite intention?

it was an example of a valid argument that is not sound. The whole point was that toasters are not all gold. That you didn't understand the point only means you need to go back and reread that post.

A cat, crossing a dune in shorter intervals at infinitum, is a fantasy, though you can give it a mathematical equation. Its nonsensical. But, a 10th grade student can give it an equation.

Zeno's paradoxes have been resolved, thanks to infinite sets.

Lol. Thats a good cut and paste answer. "I don't see why it is impossible". What ever anyone says just cut and paste this: "I don't see why it is impossible".

A toad can jump zigzag, ad infinitum, progressively longer in intervals, across the world, within a finite time period, a multiple finite time periods, and is that possible?

Well, a toad is limited to being mortal and to the size of its jumps.

Who said anything about finite time periods?

 

[Polymath257]

A minus integer. Today? Lol. Just think about it.

OK, I did. And now? What is your point? it works just as well for any integer he happens to be at.

 

[firedragon]

Easy, almost trivial, mathematical model.

Good god. Below pathetic Poly. I mean at a baby's level really. Is that even what I asked? I know that you have to jump to defend your "we" group blindly but at this level?

Impossible.

 

[Polymath257]

Good god. Below pathetic Poly. I mean at a baby's level really. Is that even what I asked? I know that you have to jump to defend your "we" group blindly but at this level?

Impossible.

I'm not defending any 'we'. I am pointing out that there is no contradiction where you seem to think there is.

yes, it is *precisely* what you asked for. It is a mathematical model of an infinite past and an infinite future with a man progressing along it.

 

[firedragon]

Yes, we can and do multiply infinities. If you double an infinite quantity, you get the same quantity. If you multiply by any finite quantity, you again get that same infinite quantity.

You dont understand that its "fantasy". Been repeating this but you are engulfed in 7th grade mathematics.

Show me how this is possible. A fish, crossing a river, in continuously smaller time frames, an ad infinitum. Fantasy, but can give a simple equation.

Do you not understand this?

 

[muhammad_isa]

An infinite line is not the diameter of any circle..

What does that mean?
If it's possible to have an infinite line, then its possible that it could be the diameter of a circle .. hence an infinite circle.

Not at all. it is possible there is an infinite regress.
...
I see it as more likely than the alternative. By far.

Keep telling yourself that. There is no first cause.
Everything is just one big merry-go-round

 

[firedragon]

I'm not defending any 'we'.

Of course you are. Since the beginning of this thread, till now. You have called it by word a "we", been calling a "we" repeatedly a "we", and you are still at it.

You defended an absurd logic of "all toasters are made of Gold", and I have asked you a dozen time (figuratively, not infinitely) to justify that premise, and you are very conveniently avoiding that question because you know that you jumped into defend your "we" group blindly.

Justify "all toasters are made of Gold". Go ahead.

 

[Polymath257]

You dont understand that its "fantasy". Been repeating this but you are engulfed in 7th grade mathematics.

Funny that you don't seem to understand it.

Show me how this is possible. A fish, crossing a river, in continuously smaller time frames, an ad infinitum. Fantasy, but can give a simple equation.

x=t with 0<=t<=1 and x representing the percentage of the river crossed.

With t=1/2, 2/3, 3/4, 4/5, 5/6, 6/7,....

there is an infinite number of time intervals and an infinite number of locations.

Do you not understand this?

Clearly, I understand it far better than you do.

Let's do this.

Can you define what it means for something to be infinite?