Into the Night
Verified User
He did not make any such argument. Aristotle wrote stuff down, Hugo.Aristotle did. And you have no fucking idea what Aristotle said about anything.
He did not make any such argument. Aristotle wrote stuff down, Hugo.Aristotle did. And you have no fucking idea what Aristotle said about anything.
The origin point is now.That's not what's being discussed. What's being discussed is how you can go through an infinite amount of time before somehow are arriving at today. An infinitely old universe is not bounded at an origin point, and it's not an issue of counting a finite series.
you are a fucking moronHe did not make any such argument. Aristotle wrote stuff down, Hugo.
So you would rather derail the thread. Gotit.Fine. But this is not my argument.
you are a fucking moronSo you would rather derail the thread. Gotit.
The universe has no day or night.^^ So, after dozens of posts you still cannot precisely explain how we arrived at the present time if the universe had to somehow pass through an infinite amount of time before today.
Gunky already answered this question for you.The fact you are studiously dodging an explanation is very telling.
I'm not. I'm just wondering where you come up with your magick numbers.All you can do is complain about the use of Earth based time units,
Irrelevance fallacy.something you never complained about before in your life until this thread.
You don't get to speak for everyone, Sybil. Omniscience fallacy. The time unit is specified (a year). Where did you come up with 13.7 billion years?When cosmologists told you previously the universe was 13.7 billion years old, you never complained about the time units they used. You knew exactly what they were talking about.
That wasn't an explanation. We do not get arbitrarily dropped on an infinite timeline out of sheer coincidence. Time unfolds sequentially. Our place in time is 13.7 billion years after the Big Band, and I don't see how it's logically possible we could have passed through an infinite amount of time prior to the Big Bang in order to reach today.Gunky answered this question for you already.
Cosmologists came up with the widely accepted value of 13.7 billion years since the Big Bang. You should have been taught this in 7th grade science class.You don't get to speak for everyone, Sybil. Omniscience fallacy. The time unit is specified (a year). Where did you come up with 13.7 billion years?
That's not what's being discussed. What's being discussed is how you can go through an infinite amount of time before somehow are arriving at today. An infinitely old universe is not bounded at an origin point, and it's not an issue of counting a finite series.
Yes it was. The number 5 is a specific number in an infinite series.That wasn't an explanation.
Random words ignored.We do not get arbitrarily dropped on an infinite timeline out of sheer coincidence.
Time is not a sequence.Time unfolds sequentially.
What Big Band???Our place in time is 13.7 billion years after the Big Band,
The Theory of the Big Bang has no time before the Big Bang.and I don't see how it's logically possible we could have passed through an infinite amount of time prior to the Big Bang in order to reach today.
Random words ignored.Any attempt to arbitrarily 'drop' us onto a point on the timeline,
A line is not a circle.or invoke circular or cyclical timelines
Buzzwords are not miracles.are equivalent to invoking miracles,
Nothing special about any Eastern religion concerning time.or invoking Eastern religious concepts of time.
Yet you are trying to make out to be.It's not scientific or logical.
So...no one. You just made up the number and are trying to quote unnamed 'experts' to justify it.Cosmologists came up with the widely accepted value of 13.7 billion years since the Big Bang.
You are not discussing science. Science is not a class.You should have been taught this in 7th grade science class.
What would be resonating?On a related note, I was reading one of MIchio Kaku's books, Hyperspace, and on page 163 (see here as page 172 or 366)
![]()
Michio Kaku Hyperspace A Scientific Odyssey Through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, And The 10th Dimens Ion : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
Michio Kaku's Hyperspace: A Scientific Odysseyarchive.org
He showed strings and gravitational force interacting and I recognized that there was a parallel between what he was saying and electrical theory using inductance and capacitance, particularly in coaxial cable. That got me thinking, What if there was a resonant frequency of the universe, like you can have in electrical circuits?
![]()
In this case, the quantum state of the universe.What would be resonating?
In this case, the quantum state of the universe.
You of the left don't believe in yesterday - only a perpetual now that conforms to party goals.It seems to me if the universe was infinetly old, there would always be at least one more day before today ever got here.
It sounds like the drugs did so much brain damage, your mind has lost it's ability to consider basic scientific questions.When I used to dabble in psychedelic drugs this was a very intriguing question. Now I just leave it up to god
A resonant frequency in electronics is one with minimal resistance to the passage of the signal. That is, it allows the signal to travel the furthest without degradation. In terms of the universe, it would allow various quantum and subatomic particles to move without resistance essentially. Of course, this is all speculative on my part.What do you mean, specifically, by the quantum state of the universe? And how does it "resonate"?
According to the Many Worlds hypothesis, there is a single universal wave function that describes the quantum state of the whole universe. I'm not sure exactly how resonance ties into this universal wave function and the Many Worlds interpretation, but I bet at some level there's a relationship.That got me thinking, What if there was a resonant frequency of the universe, like you can have in electrical circuits?
The universe is not a quanta.In this case, the quantum state of the universe.
You aren't discussing science, Sybil. Science is not a question.It sounds like the drugs did so much brain damage, your mind has lost it's ability to consider basic scientific questions.