The idea of an infinite past

[untermensche]

How can the universe be infinite yet have a start?

 

[Beer With Straw]

How can the universe be infinite yet have a start?

Well, maybe time started at the Big Bang singularity but the metric volume after is unbounded. EDIT: I meant space and time, like the 4th dimension.

For intuition, it can be understood that a finite universe has a finite volume that, for example, could be in theory filled up with a finite amount of material, while an infinite universe is unbounded and no numerical volume could possibly fill it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe#Infinite_or_finite

 

[untermensche]

How did space become unbounded between the Big Bang and now?

 

[Beer With Straw]

How did space become unbounded between the Big Bang and now?

Me, well, personally I don't exactly know, but the Wiki link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe#Infinite_or_finite did have a lot of info, but also indicates more citations are needed.

The exact shape is still a matter of debate in physical cosmology, but experimental data from various, independent sources (WMAP, BOOMERanG, and Planck for example) confirm that the observable universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error.[3][4][5] Theorists have been trying to construct a formal mathematical model of the shape of the universe. In formal terms, this is a 3-manifold model corresponding to the spatial section (in comoving coordinates) of the 4-dimensional space-time of the universe. The model most theorists currently use is the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) model. Arguments have been put forward that the observational data best fit with the conclusion that the shape of the global universe is infinite and flat,[6] but the data are also consistent with other possible shapes, such as the so-called Poincaré dodecahedral space[7][8] and the Sokolov-Starobinskii space (quotient of the upper half-space model of hyperbolic space by 2-dimensional lattice).[9]

 

[DBT]

I have never spoken about "everything".

I have only spoken about what can be observed in some way.

I was clearly referring to everything that exists, and presumably can be detected. Which you claimed must have a cause and a beginning.

That is what we are obviously talking about...not things that can't be detected.

Is that that escape clause....that a first cause is undetectable therefore exempt from your rule that everything that exists (detectable) must have a beginning and a cause?

The events in the past are complete at every present moment. If time stopped at some moment all the events in the past would be complete. No more events would occur.

Who says that time must stop, or must have stopped at some point in an infinite past?

Infinity means more that 'series.' If a Universe or Multiverse is Infinite it has no beginning and no end and no stops.

 

[untermensche]

I have never spoken about "everything".

I have only spoken about what can be observed in some way.

I was clearly referring to everything that exists, and presumably can be detected.

Nothing was clear about it. That you think it was clear is a problem.

The word "everything" does not by some psychic magic become "everything that exists, and presumably can be detected".

What does the word "everything" become on Tuesdays? Everything that can float and deflect sunlight?

The events in the past are complete at every present moment. If time stopped at some moment all the events in the past would be complete. No more events would occur.

Who says that time must stop, or must have stopped at some point in an infinite past?

Infinity means more that 'series.' If a Universe or Multiverse is Infinite it has no beginning and no end and no stops.

The term "no beginning" makes no sense. It cannot be explained in any way. It is not a rational term. It is not a mathematical concept. It is a fantasy term for children and comic books.

Past events------Present------Future events

If we look at past events from a present moment they have all happened. They have all completed.

At a present moments the only events that will occur are future events.

Infinity is not compatible with completion. Infinities do not complete. Ever.

Infinity is not compatible with the past.

 

[untermensche]

How did space become unbounded between the Big Bang and now?

Me, well, personally I don't exactly know, but the Wiki link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe#Infinite_or_finite did have a lot of info, but also indicates more citations are needed.

The exact shape is still a matter of debate in physical cosmology, but experimental data from various, independent sources (WMAP, BOOMERanG, and Planck for example) confirm that the observable universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error.[3][4][5] Theorists have been trying to construct a formal mathematical model of the shape of the universe. In formal terms, this is a 3-manifold model corresponding to the spatial section (in comoving coordinates) of the 4-dimensional space-time of the universe. The model most theorists currently use is the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) model. Arguments have been put forward that the observational data best fit with the conclusion that the shape of the global universe is infinite and flat,[6] but the data are also consistent with other possible shapes, such as the so-called Poincaré dodecahedral space[7][8] and the Sokolov-Starobinskii space (quotient of the upper half-space model of hyperbolic space by 2-dimensional lattice).[9]

I would need to be able to question somebody who claimed the universe was infinite to discover how they make this conclusion. Saying because it fits some invented model is weak.

How does an infinity complete? How do infinite events complete at every present moment?

Some have claimed that all you have to do is say the magic word "set" and somehow an infinity completes.

Ridiculous. Not even worthy of notice.

 

[Beer With Straw]

Me, well, personally I don't exactly know, but the Wiki link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe#Infinite_or_finite did have a lot of info, but also indicates more citations are needed.

I would need to be able to question somebody who claimed the universe was infinite to discover how they make this conclusion. Saying because it fits some invented model is weak.

How does an infinity complete? How do infinite events complete at every present moment?

Some have claimed that all you have to do is say the magic word "set" and somehow an infinity completes.

Ridiculous. Not even worthy of notice.

1=1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16+1/32...

 

[untermensche]

Me, well, personally I don't exactly know, but the Wiki link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe#Infinite_or_finite did have a lot of info, but also indicates more citations are needed.

I would need to be able to question somebody who claimed the universe was infinite to discover how they make this conclusion. Saying because it fits some invented model is weak.

How does an infinity complete? How do infinite events complete at every present moment?

Some have claimed that all you have to do is say the magic word "set" and somehow an infinity completes.

Ridiculous. Not even worthy of notice.

1=1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16+1/32...

What is the smallest fraction in that series? What is the second smallest?

I don't think you will ever reach 1.

The series is a series that approaches 1. It does not equal 1.

 

[Beer With Straw]

1=1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16+1/32...

What is the smallest fraction in that series? What is the second smallest?

I don't think you will ever reach 1.

The series is a series that approaches 1. It does not equal 1.

I've crossed that limit every time I walk one meter.

 

[untermensche]

1=1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16+1/32...

What is the smallest fraction in that series? What is the second smallest?

I don't think you will ever reach 1.

The series is a series that approaches 1. It does not equal 1.

I've crossed that limit every time I walk one meter.

No you haven't. You have moved a finite distance with moves of finite distances.

A human cannot move an infinitely small distance.

Besides no such distance exists.

Trying to apply infinity to the real world is an absurdity.

 

[fromderinside]

<-------(infinite time in the past)--------yesterday--------a present moment

How do we get from <---- to yesterday?

How is this achieved?

How many events occurred between <---- and yesterday?

It is easy to see how we get from yesterday to any present moment because the events were finite.

To get to any point in time the events before it must be finite.

Your post has nothing to do with the OP. Infinite is a count or measure. It is. One doesn't get there. Gettings are states of processes which is something to be discussed elsewhere..

 

[untermensche]

Events occurring is a process.

Not a stasis.

 

[Beer With Straw]

I've crossed that limit every time I walk one meter.

No you haven't. You have moved a finite distance with moves of finite distances.

A human cannot move an infinitely small distance.

Besides no such distance exists.

Trying to apply infinity to the real world is an absurdity.

I bet your despise of infinity is just an excuse to put a God in the gap that infinity fills just fine without.

We need infinity to complete the number line!

 

[fromderinside]

get a grip. infinity is applied to count and measure. That is it's existing definition. Should you want to talk about process find a thread on process. Don't try to impose something that is not there on the question being considered.

.., and even if process were part of the topic, which is is not, we would be looking at infinite processes which such as the universe may be. The universe may be a multiverse or a chaotic thing. If we look at limits we find that energy cannot be stable at zero motion, that whenever motion approaches zero in on context it energy appears in another. Perhaps the mechanism for an infinite process in one that is generally considered to be winding down. Musts have a habit of becoming probabilities, maybes, whenever we approach them empirically. So the relation between process and stasis is blurred, perhaps non-existent.

Laying demands on what has to happen is the bane of science since whenever someone does that that one's pet is overturned.

OK now back to your chants.

We are, in this discussion, at the point of finding the difference between misconstrued rational discussion and probabilistic empirical discussion.

 

[untermensche]

I've crossed that limit every time I walk one meter.

No you haven't. You have moved a finite distance with moves of finite distances.

A human cannot move an infinitely small distance.

Besides no such distance exists.

Trying to apply infinity to the real world is an absurdity.

I bet your despise of infinity is just an excuse to put a God in the gap that infinity fills just fine without.

We need infinity to complete the number line!

Infinity is not an end point. It is not the finish of anything.

Infinities do not have end points.

And the gods don't interest me at all.

 

[untermensche]

get a grip. infinity is applied to count and measure. That is it's existing definition. Should you want to talk about process find a thread on process. Don't try to impose something that is not there on the question being considered.

.., and even if process were part of the topic, which is is not, we would be looking at infinite processes which such as the universe may be. The universe may be a multiverse or a chaotic thing. If we look at limits we find that energy cannot be stable at zero motion, that whenever motion approaches zero in on context it energy appears in another. Perhaps the mechanism for an infinite process in one that is generally considered to be winding down. Musts have a habit of becoming probabilities, maybes, whenever we approach them empirically. So the relation between process and stasis is blurred, perhaps non-existent.

Laying demands on what has to happen is the bane of science since whenever someone does that that one's pet is overturned.

OK now back to your chants.

We are, in this discussion, at the point of finding the difference between misconstrued rational discussion and probabilistic empirical discussion.

Get an argument.

Infinity applies to no count. It is a process of counting without end. No matter where you are in your count you are infinitely away from the finish. You cannot approach the finish no less have a finish.

Nothing has the quantity "infinity".

And nothing is infinite meters wide. Infinity is not a quantity.

It is the process of an expanding width without end.

 

[Juma]

get a grip. infinity is applied to count and measure. That is it's existing definition. Should you want to talk about process find a thread on process. Don't try to impose something that is not there on the question being considered.

.., and even if process were part of the topic, which is is not, we would be looking at infinite processes which such as the universe may be. The universe may be a multiverse or a chaotic thing. If we look at limits we find that energy cannot be stable at zero motion, that whenever motion approaches zero in on context it energy appears in another. Perhaps the mechanism for an infinite process in one that is generally considered to be winding down. Musts have a habit of becoming probabilities, maybes, whenever we approach them empirically. So the relation between process and stasis is blurred, perhaps non-existent.

Laying demands on what has to happen is the bane of science since whenever someone does that that one's pet is overturned.

OK now back to your chants.

We are, in this discussion, at the point of finding the difference between misconstrued rational discussion and probabilistic empirical discussion.

Get an argument.

Infinity applies to no count. It is a process of counting without end. No matter where you are in your count you are infinitely away from the finish. You cannot approach the finish no less have a finish.

Nothing has the quantity "infinity".

And nothing is infinite meters wide. Infinity is not a quantity.

It is the process of an expanding width without end.

The infinite isnt a process.

 

[DBT]

Nothing was clear about it. That you think it was clear is a problem.

The word "everything" does not by some psychic magic become "everything that exists, and presumably can be detected".

What does the word "everything" become on Tuesdays? Everything that can float and deflect sunlight?

The events in the past are complete at every present moment. If time stopped at some moment all the events in the past would be complete. No more events would occur.

Who says that time must stop, or must have stopped at some point in an infinite past?

Infinity means more that 'series.' If a Universe or Multiverse is Infinite it has no beginning and no end and no stops.

The term "no beginning" makes no sense. It cannot be explained in any way. It is not a rational term. It is not a mathematical concept. It is a fantasy term for children and comic books.

Past events------Present------Future events

If we look at past events from a present moment they have all happened. They have all completed.

At a present moments the only events that will occur are future events.

Infinity is not compatible with completion. Infinities do not complete. Ever.

Infinity is not compatible with the past.

You are still avoiding the problem of infinite regression. You claim that everything that exists, that can be detected, must have a beginning and a cause....so what about the cause? Does it too require a beginning and a cause?

A simple yes or no answer will do.

 

[untermensche]

I have explained this to you several times.

A beginning to the events in time is an unknown.

All we know for certain is one is needed.

Infinities do not exist and they certainly don't complete.