- Jul 9, 2002
- 2,929
- 725
- 51
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
"I it so hard for you to accept that the human capacity for understanding timelessness is limited by our timebound mentality?"
It is. A state of timelessness depends on time being a property of matter and not merely a concept doesn't it? We've agreed that the jury is out on that haven't we?
Please provide empirical evidence for your view that time is not a physical property or answer the question as presented. Or just ignore this and let this part of the discussion die.
I don't equate "eternal" with "timeless" as I see no reason why something eternal cannot exist in time. Do you have any evidence about what a "growing number of physicists believe" regarding a singularity? I'm afraid my subscription to higher physics weekly has run out.
I think I saw something about it on the Universe, I'm sure you can find something online about it. This is a Wikipedia article on Loop Quantum Gravity Theory, which if proved would replace the Big Bang singularity with a Big Bounce.
Loop quantum gravity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Ultimately neither argument has empirical proof."
Are you saying the big bang has no empirical proof? Or that the singularity preceding it has no empirical proof...or both?
For now I am only saying that there is no empirical proof for an infinite regression of time for the pre-Big Bang singularity. My understanding is that the whole concept of the Big Bang singularity is currently being debated.
BTW, still waiting for your view on how to determine reality. Maybe you answered somewhere along the way in your discussion with someone else, but all I have seen is a brief recent reference to "logic and reason". A bit more of a detailed explanation would be appreciated.
Upvote
0