Argument from Motion

182 posts / 0 new

Last post

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 02:44

#32

chimp3

RadicalWhiggery: Why just one

RadicalWhiggery: Why just one Prime Mover? Why not a pantheon of gods?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 04:55

(Reply to #32) #33

Chris McDearman

I never said it just had to

I never said it just had to be one.

Fri, 01/27/2017 - 13:13

(Reply to #33) #34

Dave Matson

RadicalWhiggery:

Would you be satisfied with empty space and quantum fluctuations?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 09:45

(Reply to #34) #35

MCDennis

Chimp. You referenced a

Chimp. You referenced a pantheon of gods... but why gods? Please consider my idea about a herd of magical, invisible universe farting unicorns. And before you criticize this, let me explain that we need a herd of them in order to address the whole multiverse thing... you know... to make this idea all sciency-like...

Justin here seems to be indifferent to the idea of gods ... and he seems instead to prefer the prime mover thing, so I think your pantheon in the sky and my paddock in the sky ideas are okay as long as we can change prime mover to prime moverS.

Fri, 01/27/2017 - 13:15

(Reply to #35) #36

Dave Matson

MCD:

A lot more colorful than my cold "space and quantum fluctuations"!

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 03:41

#37

Salman Durrani

Hi Everyone. New here. Please

Hi Everyone. New here. Please don't eat me alive... :/

I think Radical is right when he talks about actual infinities not existing, since they create various logical paradoxes...

1) First, that A != A+B ( where A,B are real numbers and "!=" denotes " not equal to " ) unless if B=0.
2) If the number of events that have occurred, when measured by any unit of our choice ( say seconds ), are infinite ( I ), then how many events would exist after two seconds?
If we say I, then that means:
I+2=I
This contradicts (1).
If we say I+2, then it is consistent with (1), but is logically invalid by the very understanding of infinity.

Though as Greensnake said, if we measure from a specific point in this infinite past, however, we would only get a finite number of events to the future... but the problem still remains is that what happens to the total number of events as we move in time...?

Fri, 01/27/2017 - 13:25

(Reply to #37) #38

Dave Matson

skd6348:

There is no total number of events! Without a beginning, you can't tally up a total number of events. Keep in mind that infinity is not a number in the sense that 6 or a million is. Therefore, it doesn't necessarily follow all the rules that apply to numbers. In mathematics, infinities are handled all the time.

Sat, 01/28/2017 - 05:47

(Reply to #38) #39

Salman Durrani

Yes, infinity isn't a number.

But my question is, if we go two steps ahead into the future, then by definition we have added something into the " category of events that already occurred" . And since this category size was infinite before, how do we deal with our new size?

Time is quantitative. You can measure it, and we do measure it. And the principles of mathematics apply to it as we deal with it so... So how can the past being infinite, or endless, deal with the idea of a finite amount being added to it?

Mon, 01/30/2017 - 00:58

(Reply to #39) #40

Dave Matson

If the previous events have

If the previous events have no beginning, then no number can give the "size" of that group. You can call it a "class one" infinity, but that label applies no matter how many finite steps you take into the future. You could treat it as a set where all its members are described. The description for the second set would simply add the new, finite amount.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 03:54

#41

Nyarlathotep

skd63482) If the number of

skd63482) If the number of events that have occurred, when measured by any unit of our choice ( say seconds )

You can stop right there as you just assigned the dimension of time to a variable used to count events. Consider the following:

Person A: Dude I'm totally stoked, my favourite band just booked some gigs on the west coast, I'm going to get to see them live this year!
Person B: How many did they book?
Person A: 3 seconds
Person B: Can I have some of that shit you are smoking?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 04:43

#42

Salman Durrani

Ummm... "Seconds" is a valid

Ummm... "Seconds" is a valid unit of for measuring a duration of event, i.e., "time". The example you gave is using a unit of time to measure something else...

I DID assign the unit " second " to measure a duration in time...

One may select any other unit, and the problem would still persist. BUT it has to be a valid unit for measuring time...

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 04:56

#43

Nyarlathotep

"Seconds" is a valid unit of

skd6348 - "Seconds" is a valid unit of for measuring a duration of event

Right but you didn't use it to represent duration, you used it to represent the number of events:

skd6348 - If the number of events that have occurred, when measured by any unit of our choice

I'm sure you can fix this quickly and just repost the argument again, but it needs to be addressed.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 05:07

#44

Salman Durrani

Oh I see. By " number of

Oh I see. By " number of events " I meant the number of units, whether it be integer or not. If our unit is second, this would mean the number of seconds...

But yeah, not the best choice of words.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 05:17

#45

Nyarlathotep

OK let me ask you this, is

OK let me ask you this, is this what you are trying to say a summary of your argument:

MathJax.Hub.Config({tex2jax: {inlineMath: [['$','$'], ['\$','\$']]}});

$$\\\infty + 2 = \infty\\
2 = \infty - \infty\\
2 = 0$$

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 05:28

#46

Salman Durrani

Some [ Math Processing Error

Some [ Math Processing Error ].

Let I represent infinity.

Adding 2 to it leads to a paradox regardless of what the sum is...

I + 2 = I is a paradox. It contradicts: [ A+B is never equal to A unless if B = 0 ]

I + 2 = ( I + 2) is a paradox. The idea of having 2 MORE than infinity contradicts the definitive understanding of infinity...

What I mean is, if the duration of time that has elapsed till now is infinite, what would be the duration of time 50,000 seconds after now?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 07:17

(Reply to #46) #47

Chris McDearman

"I + 2 = I is a paradox. It

"I + 2 = I is a paradox. It contradicts: [ A+B is never equal to A unless if B = 0 ]"

This isn't a paradox because infinity isn't a number. I think the more pressing question is why time exists at all if it was never created. Is time necessary? If so, did the big bang occur within time?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 08:01

(Reply to #47) #48

Salman Durrani

Exactly. Infinity isn't. The

Exactly. Infinity isn't. The reason I'm treating it like one initially is to show that using infinity in such equations leads to contradictions...

As far as why time exists, what are your views?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 08:06

(Reply to #48) #49

Chris McDearman

I think an intellect of some

I think an intellect of some sorts created time and space. Time itself is not eternal. It must have a starting point.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 08:28

(Reply to #49) #50

Salman Durrani

Starting point in what? I

Starting point in what? I mean if there was no time, even as a concept, so there can't be any concept of beginning or end, temporally???

I mean, what sort of " creation " occurs outside a time frame?

Maybe if you'd define " creation " as used here, that'd help.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 09:48

(Reply to #50) #51

Nyarlathotep

One interesting option that

One interesting option that is often overlooked is a finite amount of time (in the past) with no starting point.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:34

(Reply to #51) #52

Salman Durrani

finite, or infinite?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 22:47

(Reply to #52) #53

Nyarlathotep

skd6348 - finite, or infinite

skd6348 - finite, or infinite?

Here I'll make it easier for you:

Nyarlathotep - One interesting option that is often overlooked is a finite amount of time (in the past) with no starting point.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:43

(Reply to #53) #54

Chris McDearman

But if there is no starting

But if there is no starting point, why is it here?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:36

(Reply to #54) #55

chimp3

@RadicalWhiggery: Why not

@RadicalWhiggery: Why not more than one intellect? Why not a pantheon of intellects?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:42

(Reply to #55) #56

Chris McDearman

I already answered this.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:55

(Reply to #56) #57

chimp3

Yet you have only spoken of

Yet you have only spoken of this intellect in the singular? Do you agree there could be more tban one?

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:56

(Reply to #57) #58

Chris McDearman

Yes I said it is certainly

Yes I said it is certainly plausible.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:58

(Reply to #58) #59

chimp3

A universe created by

A universe created by committee would explain many things. Take the platypus for example.

Thu, 01/26/2017 - 16:58

(Reply to #59) #60

Chris McDearman

LOL

Fri, 01/27/2017 - 13:40

(Reply to #60) #61

Dave Matson

RadicalWhiggery:

How do you know that time is not eternal? Who says that time can't exist outside of our Big Bang universe? Such time would not be connected to our time, but why couldn't it exist? Ditto for space. Can time be nonlinear? Einstein spoke of spacetime which can be curved into a form that is not infinite. I'm not saying that there are no good answers, only that these thing need to be considered.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.

You are here

Pages