3 minutes ago, MigL said:

Sorry, typing too quick ( at work ).
The infinity of real numbers is a higher order of infinity than the infinity of natural numbers.
IOW, there are more points between 1 and 2 than can be put into correspondence with 1,2,3,4,5, ... infinity

Events can be ordered by assigning a number to them.

You’re right. My bad. The problem still remains though.

The present should be unreachable if the past is truly infinite.

The causal chain leading to “now” is infinitely long.

There is no ultimate cause. How can an effect exist if its causal history never “starts”?

But like I said, you’re one of those people who will probably die believing that an endless chain of causality is possible within the framework of all existence. You equate numbers with existence. Which is fine. Thats your preference. If that helps you understand things then have at it.

Edited October 30Oct 30 by King Phenomenon

10 minutes ago, King Phenomenon said:

You’re right. My bad. The problem still remains though.

The present should be unreachable if the past is truly infinite.

The causal chain leading to “now” is infinitely long.

There is no ultimate cause. How can an effect exist if its causal history never “starts”?

But like I said, you’re one of those people who will probably die believing that an endless chain of causality is possible within the framework of all existence. You equate numbers with existence. Which is fine. Thats your preference. If that helps you understand things then have at it.

You are still wrong.

By the way scientists don't believe in things - they deduce them - Belief is for religous folk.

Did you not re-read what I wrote.

Postulate 1 defines a start. In the case of the natural numbers that is 1, yet the natural numbers do indeed go on to infinity.

Existence is of course a much less well defined concept.

What do you mean by existence /

You seem to be entertaining only material objects, but there is much that is immaterial in our universe.

For instance the configuration of the solar system is immaterial but since the material solar system exists its configuration must also exist.

21 minutes ago, MigL said:

Sorry, typing too quick ( at work ).
The infinity of real numbers is a higher order of infinity than the infinity of natural numbers.
IOW, there are more points between 1 and 2 than can be put into correspondence with 1,2,3,4,5, ... infinity

Events can be ordered by assigning a number to them.

All of infinite space. There had to have been a beginning. People have been debating this for centuries.

10 minutes ago, studiot said:

You are still wrong.

By the way scientists don't believe in things - they deduce them - Belief is for religous folk.

Did you not re-read what I wrote.

Postulate 1 defines a start. In the case of the natural numbers that is 1, yet the natural numbers do indeed go on to infinity.

Existence is of course a much less well defined concept.

What do you mean by existence /

You seem to be entertaining only material objects, but there is much that is immaterial in our universe.

For instance the configuration of the solar system is immaterial but since the material solar system exists its configuration must also exist.

I know all space is made up of material write down to the quantum level.

Edited October 30Oct 30 by King Phenomenon

7 minutes ago, King Phenomenon said:

All of infinite space. There had to have been a beginning.

Define 'beginning'.
Of what ???

Geometry is only emergent ( ? ) upon reaching Planck scale/time.
Prior ( what does that mean then ? ) to that there is no time or causality ( look up Quantum foam ), so that condition could have had an infinite existence.

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

Define 'beginning'.
Of what ???

Geometry is only emergent ( ? ) upon reaching Planck scale/time.
Prior ( what does that mean then ? ) to that there is no time or causality ( look up Quantum foam ), so that condition could have had an infinite existence.

Beginning= not having an infinite past. I thought I made that clear in the OP.

Beginning of all existence…

Edited October 30Oct 30 by King Phenomenon

Just now, King Phenomenon said:

Beginning= not having an infinite past. I thought I made that clear in the OP.

What would infinite time/past mean if did not proceed, as we know it, before the BB?

Edited October 30Oct 30 by StringJunky

10 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

What would infinite time/past mean if did not proceed, as we know it, before the BB?

Not following you

4 minutes ago, King Phenomenon said:

Not following you

If time has no meaning or existence before the big bang, how can we talk about an infinite past? Talking about an infinite past prior to the big bang assumes it proceeded, as we know it, in a linear fashion.

Edited October 30Oct 30 by StringJunky

1 hour ago, King Phenomenon said:

Read the OP

I did. Where’s the actual contradiction? Why can’t you have an infinite number of steps?

12 minutes ago, swansont said:

I did. Where’s the actual contradiction? Why can’t you have an infinite number of steps?

It’s in the OP

15 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

If time has no meaning or existence before the big bang, how can we talk about an infinite past? Talking about an infinite past prior to the big bang assumes it proceeded, as we know it, in a linear fashion.

You’re welcome to assume it all you like.

8 minutes ago, King Phenomenon said:

It’s in the OP

You’re welcome to assume it all you like.

I just leave it at the BB. Thus far, it is unknowable.

24 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

If time has no meaning or existence before the big bang, how can we talk about an infinite past? Talking about an infinite past prior to the big bang assumes it proceeded, as we know it, in a linear fashion.

Does talking about six headed pink dragons make them real too?

Just now, King Phenomenon said:

Does talking about six headed pink dragons make them real too?

That is what you are doing.

1 minute ago, StringJunky said:

I just leave it at the BB. Thus far, it is unknowable.

I choose to know.

Just now, StringJunky said:

That is what you are doing.

No, I’m using sound logic to arrive at a conclusion.

Just now, King Phenomenon said:

I choose to know.

No, I’m using sound logic to arrive at a conclusion.

'Logic' being that which makes sense to you, but it is not scientific. Commonsense doesn't apply in the quantum arena.

Edited October 30Oct 30 by StringJunky

1 minute ago, StringJunky said:

'Logic' being that which makes sense to you, but it is not scientific.

If you’re content not knowing then all the power to ya.

Just now, King Phenomenon said:

If you’re content not knowing then all the power to ya.

It is not a question of being content, but of accepting the current state of knowledge by people that do this for a living. I can come up with brain farts all day... but that's all they are.

Edited October 30Oct 30 by StringJunky

2 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

It is not a question of being content, but of accepting the current state of knowledge by people that do this for a living. I can come with brain farts all day... but that's all they are.

If you want to accept the “knowledge” of others all the power to ya. I choose to use the brain God gave me to understand things where science falls short.

Just now, King Phenomenon said:

If you want to accept the “knowledge” of others all the power to ya. I choose to use the brain God gave me to understand things where science falls short.

I'm not that narcissistic.

2 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I'm not that narcissistic.

If you don’t think your brain is capable of understanding things that science can’t explain then all the power to ya.. I choose to know my brain is capable.

1 hour ago, King Phenomenon said:

It’s in the OP

No, it’s not. The OP makes an assertion, which you have not supported.

30 minutes ago, swansont said:

No, it’s not. The OP makes an assertion, which you have not supported.

Yes, I did add Support in the OP. But apparently that wasn’t enough for you.

36 minutes ago, swansont said:

No, it’s not. The OP makes an assertion, which you have not supported.

But here’s a few things that I discussed in the thread that you missed. Maybe this will be good enough for you. Probably not though.

The present should be unreachable if the past is truly infinite.

The causal chain leading to “now” is infinitely long.

There is no ultimate cause. How can an effect exist if its causal history never “starts”?

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

Commonsense doesn't apply in the quantum arena.

Yeah it does. I know that there is no true empty space”. All space in existence is filled with quantum particles interacting with one another. We will never discover these particles as they are too small. And life goes on.

Edited October 30Oct 30 by King Phenomenon

3 hours ago, King Phenomenon said:

I know all space is made up of material write down to the quantum level.

49 minutes ago, King Phenomenon said:

But here’s a few things that I discussed in the thread that you missed. Maybe this will be good enough for you. Probably not though.

The present should be unreachable if the past is truly infinite.

The causal chain leading to “now” is infinitely long.

There is no ultimate cause. How can an effect exist if its causal history never “starts”?

It's clear you are intent on ignoring anything said to you that is against your gospel so I will leave you happy with the gaderines.

Good night.

15 minutes ago, studiot said:

It's clear you are intent on ignoring anything said to you that is against your gospel so I will leave you happy with the gaderines.

Good night.

Night

2 hours ago, King Phenomenon said:

But here’s a few things that I discussed in the thread that you missed.

No, I didn’t, but you specifically said to look at the OP, as if that was sufficient.

2 hours ago, King Phenomenon said:

Maybe this will be good enough for you. Probably not though.

The present should be unreachable if the past is truly infinite.

The causal chain leading to “now” is infinitely long.

So?

2 hours ago, King Phenomenon said:

There is no ultimate cause.

So you say, but you do not justify this.

What if we assume there is a cause. What prevents and infinite number of events from getting to an arbitrary point in time?