Mac
The discussion in this thread is about wether or not time itself had a beginning or not.
Your statement (assumption) is that time must have had a begin, and you arrive at that conclusion based
on the following facts:
1- In the real physical world infinite measurements can not be taken
2- All physical things have had a begin (in time)
But then, this assumption would need you to proof (from physcial theory), how it is possible that something material, including space and time itself, comes into existence from nothing at all.
My rebuttal against this is that:
1- The infinite exists only in finite forms, so the contradiction in reality never is established. Physical reality is composed of finite values only. The reality of spacetime is that it is unbounded: there is no finite upper limit for the extend of spacetime.
2- This is a one sided aspect, since at the same time, all things that did have a begin (in time), were transformation or changes from previous material states or thing, and not from nothing
And lastly, my argument is that there can not be a physcial theory that could explain any material existence form, to start existing from a total nothing, the absence of anything physical.
My conclusions are therefore:
a. You did not provide a logical proof why there could not be infinity. Your arguments step side over the subtilities of infinity, and contain no argument why time should have needed a begin.
The current "setlement" for this issue is that spacetime is unbounded and contains no edges.
b. The reasoning about the begin of the universe (all things start to exist, therefore also the universe must start to exist) is taken from a one sided approach. Adding the other side, will yield the opposite conclusion: the universe did not start in or from nothing.
c. You did not provide any proof for the "coming into existence" of anything material/physical from a total nothing.
And for that reason, my assumption that time did not have a begin, still stands.
And for all correctness: my arguments did not provide a "proof" of the beginninlesness of time, since such a thing can not be experimentally proven in any direct way.
The infinite is never "real" in the sense that it is a physcial value that can be measured. The infinite exists purely and solely in finite values, but which do not have a determination in the sense that there should be a finite upper bound. In that sense, spacetime is unbounded, and not finite.
Your statements did not deal with this subtility of infinity, your whole concept of infinity is that what Hegel calls 'bad infinity' (an infinity which is supposed to be counted).
In fact, the whole discussion is purely and only about this aspect of the infinite.
When we go back to our example of the line that extends in both ways to infinity.
This line then can be said to be a mathematical abstraction of time.
I don't argue here that this line "realy" exists in physical reality, that is not
the point.
The point is, given this abstraction of an infinite line, we can place any two points
on that line, and we will measure a finite distance between them. Always, no matter
where we place the points.
The infinity of the line itself, therefore in reality can no be expressed but in the
form of finite values.
But from that it does not follow that THEREFORE the line itself needs to be finite, i.e.
it does not proof that there is a begin or end to the line itself.
As proven in the mathematical example, such is not the case, since there is no upper bound
that is a finite value for any measurement between any two points on the line.
Now, when we adapt this on physical reality, what needs to be said is that we strongly assume
that spacetime itself does not have an edge or boundary. And how could it be, since outside
of all matter change&motion (in whatever form) in all space and time, there is nothing
that could determine or form a boundary to the universe.
Spacetime does not have a boundary opr edge. That is why we don't find any special point
on the line, which could be called a begin or end. All points on the line are in fact equal.
That is how modern physics also reflects on spacetime and the issue of a "begin of time", i.e. that such an event does not and can not exist.
And that is exactly what my position is, contrary to yours.
