I thought something along those lines too for a while. Then I was shot down. I'm not sure if I completely understand it, but here's the explanation for why time cannot be infinate- and bear with me, this is going to be a rocky explanation
( ... )
Its possible, but i believe it's rather unlikely. If time were linear, there would be anti-time too or negative time [farther than history]. There would still be no true starting point because the line would be infinitely long.
It's easier to approach this problem through calculus than through religion, well mostly because if god is an infinite being then all of our laws of physics and mathematics go to shit when we count him in the equation.
So An equation for time could look like this:
Lim a->0 (x - h)2 / a2 + (y - k)2 / b2
a=b
Therefore, the circle would have to be soo massive that we could only comprehend it in linear terms.
Also for an Infinite being (god) it would be easy for him or her (it really) to set this all up, because, well, he is infinite.
Re: perhaps
anonymous
January 12 2005, 20:15:13 UTC
I don't think the "anti" rule applies to time, because time isn't tangible.
I don't like the idea of time moving linearly, but it cannot be infinate. It's just absolutely impossible, mathematically speaking I suppose.
Once, while trying to argue the case for the existance of free will, a philosopher ans scientist once supposed that time doesn't exist at all. That all events happened at exactly the same instant. One bright happening,...the universe is created and destroyed, everyone lives and dies and has children at once...blink of an eye, every singe thing that ever will happen happens....because (and this is assuming there is a God) God is omnipotent and limitless and he is able to handle, and organize EVERYTHING at once. Time is an illusion created by God, because our minds and wills aren't able to handle everything at once.
I've always loved and hated that explanation. but it's valid as anything else.
Mathematically speaking though.... Time is a spacial dimension; therefore, all mathmetical laws would apply. Think of it more like a plane that intersects the other three dimensions at perfect ninety degree angles. When this happens you can treat time, though it's intangible, as another dimension similar to the x-, y-, and z-axis. Its hard to think about in our minds but it could look something like this:
Billy is right. Mathematical laws are correct. Think about 2+2 = 4. That's law, and it's correct...it works for higher level math too. Now I (unlike brandon) don't like to use relgion to explain these sort of things...because human religion has been wrong FAR more often than scientific law.
But I don't think of science and math as the more valuable of the two- I use them hand in hand to double-check eachother. Weigh the science against the morals, and weigh the religious codex against scientific fact.
My thoughts, part ImrwhippymugJanuary 14 2005, 01:10:24 UTC
Well, i guess it's time for me to expound upon this insane over-analysis of the dimensional quantification of the universe concatenated with a discussion the moral ramifications of an omnipresent being, while exploring the possible connection binding the latter to the former...oi, here we go...I believe scientific laws, though not completely accurate and perfect, are correct enough for our purposes. I don't think God would create us in his image and give us an intellectual inability to comprehend our surroundings and the physical laws that govern them. We're always learning new things, too. A law is not infinite by any means. It exists for our current purposes and is a quaint place-holder until we find something better, more apropos. Scientific laws are constantly being proven wrong, and scientists constantly strive to prove them wrong
( ... )
Re: My thoughts, part IwildirishroverJanuary 14 2005, 06:52:03 UTC
yeah except when anti matter and matter meet the explode in a hot white flash, i hope i never meet my anti-self, and if i did i wouldnt shake his hand.
My thoughts, part IImrwhippymugJanuary 14 2005, 01:10:55 UTC
I don’t agree with the notion that just because God is infinite and deals in infinite time, he can’t also, at the same time, deal with finite time. A good example would be a DVD player. If we take the regular movie speed to be finite time, then we would, for the purposes of this illustration, have relatively infinite control over that time, and thus exist in infinite time in relation to the movie. We have the power to slow the movie down or speed the movie up, or not watch it at all. However, that’s not to say that we can’t pick and choose certain points of the movie and watch them at normal speed, or watch the whole movie from the beginning at normal speed. Albeit a rough metaphor, that’s how I would view God’s control over finite time. There was a certain point in time that we believe the universe was created. A hyper-dense ball of matter, roughly the size of an atom, exploded, filling a void with matter, dark matter, anti-matter, and anything else we haven’t discovered yet. Now, where did that matter come from? One theory
( ... )
Re: My thoughts, part IImrwhippymugJanuary 14 2005, 15:24:59 UTC
Aren't we confusing scientific (or mathematical) law with Theorey? Theories get proven wrong constantly...but law?? Maybe I'm mistaken, but It was my understanding that we never disprove laws, only theories (for the most part, anyway)
And when I'm talking religion, I'm not limiting myself to judeau/christian ideas, I'm using the word as an all-encompassing term. Wiccanism, ancient druids, nomadic religions in north america, ancient greek and roman religion, hinduism, and yadds yadda yadda. There's a BUNCH of old religions (some more ridiculous than others, in my opinion) that have attempted to explain what we do not know, and have been WAY off...yet people believed in them literally for ages...that's why I start with scientific fact, and add religion on from there :O)
Re: My thoughts, part IIwildirishroverJanuary 14 2005, 21:02:17 UTC
when have we ever been way off, mathematically speaking? sure our explanations have been ridiculous when we're trying to explain things [ie earth=flat].
Religions are wrong because they cause ppl to believe, not think. I have this crazy idea that it is much better to have ideas about something rather than beliefs.
sure nick thats the beauty on infinite beings, physicists can only go so far nick and then its all on the mathematicians!
[sidebar] did you know that if you were given the number line and you were told to pick any value. the probability of you picking a real number is zero? yep that boggled my mind today in my mathematics course!
Comments 18
Reply
It's easier to approach this problem through calculus than through religion, well mostly because if god is an infinite being then all of our laws of physics and mathematics go to shit when we count him in the equation.
So An equation for time could look like this:
Lim a->0 (x - h)2 / a2 + (y - k)2 / b2
a=b
Therefore, the circle would have to be soo massive that we could only comprehend it in linear terms.
Also for an Infinite being (god) it would be easy for him or her (it really) to set this all up, because, well, he is infinite.
Reply
I don't like the idea of time moving linearly, but it cannot be infinate. It's just absolutely impossible, mathematically speaking I suppose.
Once, while trying to argue the case for the existance of free will, a philosopher ans scientist once supposed that time doesn't exist at all. That all events happened at exactly the same instant. One bright happening,...the universe is created and destroyed, everyone lives and dies and has children at once...blink of an eye, every singe thing that ever will happen happens....because (and this is assuming there is a God) God is omnipotent and limitless and he is able to handle, and organize EVERYTHING at once. Time is an illusion created by God, because our minds and wills aren't able to handle everything at once.
I've always loved and hated that explanation. but it's valid as anything else.
Reply
Its hard to think about in our minds but it could look something like this:
http://www.lactamme.polytechnique.fr/Mosaic/images/HCUB.11.D/image.jpg
As you add more and more dimensions you can create a very very complex picture of the universe...... an example found at:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Hypercube.html
Crazy no?
Reply
But I don't think of science and math as the more valuable of the two- I use them hand in hand to double-check eachother. Weigh the science against the morals, and weigh the religious codex against scientific fact.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
And when I'm talking religion, I'm not limiting myself to judeau/christian ideas, I'm using the word as an all-encompassing term. Wiccanism, ancient druids, nomadic religions in north america, ancient greek and roman religion, hinduism, and yadds yadda yadda. There's a BUNCH of old religions (some more ridiculous than others, in my opinion) that have attempted to explain what we do not know, and have been WAY off...yet people believed in them literally for ages...that's why I start with scientific fact, and add religion on from there :O)
Reply
Religions are wrong because they cause ppl to believe, not think. I have this crazy idea that it is much better to have ideas about something rather than beliefs.
Reply
Reply
thats the beauty on infinite beings, physicists can only go so far nick and then its all on the mathematicians!
[sidebar] did you know that if you were given the number line and you were told to pick any value. the probability of you picking a real number is zero? yep that boggled my mind today in my mathematics course!
Reply
Leave a comment