Infinity and Present Day

[click here]

This is my first sylogism so I may not have the concept right.


Premise 1: All future dates in time are attainable only through the passing of those before.
Premise 2: You can not arrive at a specific date in time without first starting somewhere in history before that.
Conclusion: The universe had a beginning or present day doesn't exist.

Please help me structure my arguement a little better though I think I am going to explain it more below.

Many seem to say on this forum that the universe had no beginning. I don't see the logic in this. For if the universe had no beginning then we would not be here right now at present day.

Here is my example.

1 billion = present day

If I ask you to count to 1 billion you will start from 1 and begin to count. You will get there after a while but you will eventually get there. So present day can be obtained if there is a start.

But if I ask you to count to 1 billion but you can not start at 1. For this time you have to get to 1 billion while counting all the way from negative infinity. The problem is you will never get to 1 billion for to count to 1 billion you need to acctually start somewhere.

[Holiday20310401]

Well time does not flow, it is always in a state of 'infinity', limited to syntax that is.

If each point in time were intrinsically connected, then ok.

[Pathfinder]

I disagree with that Holiday.

My advice would be first of all to avoid equating 1 billion with present day where you say

1billion= present day

Because in order to count to 1 billion it would take more than 24 hours, which would take you out of the present day you are equating to.

I do agree that to reach present day there had to be a past day to get there.

Basically what you are saying is that we cannot have a day,24 hours, without the previous accumulation of the other 23 hours ahead of it. Hense that there must have been the first second of the first minute of the first hour, etc. etc.

[Holiday20310401]

Ahh, so the limited time it takes for information to er... 'move' (lol, I know) causes a perceived beginning and perceived end, but is not actually so. Same dif. And no pathfinder I am not saying much of those things that you claim me to be saying.

[Pathfinder]

sorry Holiday,

i was quoting what the thread author was saying, I simply disagreed with your premise in your reply.

And I would suggest that there is no perceived end, only a beginning. One cannot know where or what the end will be, ever.

[Holiday20310401]

Right when we start talking about infinite, we are having a discussion of syntax. Else, I have to kindly disagree with your statement.

[Pathfinder]

I shouldn't speak for the thread author, but it seems to me that they were not talking about infinity as much as they were talking about origin. I think they were clearly trying to show that there is really no such thing as infinity.

[nameless]

Originally Posted by click here

Premise 1: All future dates in time are attainable only through the passing of those before.

'If'! Only valid/true from a specific linear Perspective.

Premise 2: You can not arrive at a specific date in time without first starting somewhere in history before that.

Again, only true from/for that linear Perspective.

Conclusion: The universe had a beginning or present day doesn't exist.

Again, only potentially valid from that particular Perspective. Within that parameter, your syllogism can hold true.
It is untrue, for instance, from a wholistic Perspective, and many others, too.
And, "everything exists"!

[Pathfinder]

Nameless,

I am wondering why we should even consdier anything other than a linear viewpoint?

[click here]

I also would like to know what we should have other then a linear viewpoint. Is there any proof at all for other theories? Or are those theories based off of theories...?