Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-18-2019 9:28 PM
32 online now:
dwise1, edge, JonF (3 members, 29 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 856,976 Year: 12,012/19,786 Month: 1,793/2,641 Week: 302/708 Day: 77/52 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Time and Beginning to Exist
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 1863 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 5 of 268 (641933)
11-24-2011 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
11-23-2011 8:28 AM


quote:
You're talking about the first moment in time, so shouldn't the reason why no cause is needed be that there was no prior time for a cause to operate?

The premise of a 'beginning' is more aligned with time than matter. The matter represents a secondary action in time.

Analogy. The first car out of the factory was a blue pontiac. Here, 'first' represents time, more than the car; the latter car is subsequential.

It raises the question whether time is an abstract premise or a definitive phenomenon which does not require any action to make it real. This raises the question, is 40 weeks the measure of a human pregnancy - or is the pregnancy subject to the 40 week time factor? Here, if we say a host of other factors determine the pregnancy, such as copulation, one can also say that cause could not activate a pregnancy if there was no time. We end up in a circular arguement - proof it is the wrong path.

IMHO, both time and matter, based on a finite universe, is irrefutably the result of an external, precedent factor, and I know of no alternative to this premise.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 11-23-2011 8:28 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Larni, posted 11-24-2011 5:20 AM IamJoseph has responded
 Message 7 by frako, posted 11-24-2011 5:30 AM IamJoseph has responded

    
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 1863 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 8 of 268 (641940)
11-24-2011 5:49 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by frako
11-24-2011 5:30 AM


quote:
Actually our boys are working on a theory that time and space are intertwined, basically one cannot exists whiteout the other.

Intertwined is valid logic. In fact, everything the universe now contains is intertwined, and all its contents would have become existent simultainiously, then became definitive entities via some form of evolving. How else - there is nowhere else for something new to come from?

quote:

Well super string theory talks about a collision between 2 universes that produced space-time and matter in our universe.


MV violates the finite factor of this universe. Also, it ends in a circular premise, negating itself from science. There is good reason behind the avoidance of a finite universe!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by frako, posted 11-24-2011 5:30 AM frako has not yet responded

    
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 1863 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 9 of 268 (641941)
11-24-2011 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Larni
11-24-2011 5:20 AM


You are being unscientific when omitting the finite evidence of the universe. I challenge you to state any scientific reasoning while addressing this universe as absolutely finite - anyone can wax poetic of an infinite realm, but it is not science!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Larni, posted 11-24-2011 5:20 AM Larni has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Admin, posted 11-24-2011 6:09 AM IamJoseph has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019