Timeless Causation

[Lord Emsworth]

I was just saying that if matter cannot have existed outside time before the start of the universe,

That only makes sense if you assert another timeline (horz) that the universe (vert) is subject to.

--------------------->
_____| (BB?)
_____|
_____|
_____|
_____|
_____v

so if that couldn't have, then it doesn't matter to life if anything else can.

I don't think this matters all that much.

 

[solarwave]

Sorry i have no idea what you ment just then.

 

[daniel777]

That only makes sense if you assert another timeline (horz) that the universe (vert) is subject to.

--------------------->
_____| (BB?)
_____|
_____|
_____|
_____|
_____v

yeah, but we weren't asserting that matter begot matter in the beginning.... a web of different realities, timelines, or whatever you want to call it is not necessary. we aren't some thread in a larger self supported fabric.... even if we are, where does the fabric come from? you can chase time back, re-establish its base in other timelines, but still you cannot know infinity.

your whole basis seems to be that a person cannot argue what you cannot comprehend or know, which would be "outside" of time. what you have failed to realize is that you cannot "know" or comprehend infinity either. neither can we explain them in human terms. we are finite beings. you cannot comprehend "infinity". we cannot comprehend "outside of time". they are both impossible states to prove by the laws of time observable by our finite mortal minds.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

yeah, but we weren't asserting that matter begot matter in the beginning....

Neither you nor me.
(Just what is it with this "matter" fixation AND this playing fast and loose with different timelines, huh?)

a web of different realities, timelines, or whatever you want to call it is not necessary.

*Sigh*

To quote myself from somewhere up above:

If I am not entirely mistaken then the universe IS a time-space continuum, or something like that. It does not (need to) exist in one. Hence, the time-space continuum that is called the universe, does not (need to) exist in another time-space continuum.​

we aren't some thread in a larger self supported fabric.... even if we are, where does the fabric come from?

The "coming from" is not necessary. It is only necessary if you subscribe to something like I outlined in my previous post in that masterful drawing.

you can chase time back, re-establish its base in other timelines, but still you cannot know infinity.

Infinity of what?

your whole basis seems to be that a person cannot argue what you cannot comprehend or know, which would be "outside" of time. what you have failed to realize is that you cannot "know" or comprehend infinity either. neither can we explain them in human terms. we are finite beings. you cannot comprehend "infinity". we cannot comprehend "outside of time". they are both impossible states to prove by the laws of time observable by our finite mortal minds.

With my "whole basis" NOT being "that a person cannot argue what you cannot comprehend or know" I think I don't have to consider any of the remaining train of thought.

 

[daniel777]

The "coming from" is not necessary. It is only necessary if you subscribe to something like I outlined in my previous post in that masterful drawing.

LOL, i thought you were ascribing to that masterful drawing.... which IS quite masterful if i do say so.

good, then we're agreed. . . .but what we're saying that the universe needs a constant base. . . . for example. take your ink pen and try to draw a line in midair, now take your pen and draw a line on a piece of paper. which method works better.

also i get what you're saying about the universe "is" itself... kind of like a pseudo "I Am" statement.... but for me that just doesn't make sense. The universe cannot exist without a determinant.
Chance isn't a powerful enough, or reasonable determining factor.... for me. God just makes more sense as a determinant in my opinion.

Infinity of what?

anything and everything.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

LOL, i thought you were ascribing to that masterful drawing.... which IS quite masterful if i do say so.

good, then we're agreed. . . .but what we're saying that the universe needs a constant base. . . . for example. take your ink pen and try to draw a line in midair, now take your pen and draw a line on a piece of paper. which method works better.

also i get what you're saying about the universe "is" itself... kind of like a pseudo "I Am" statement.... but for me that just doesn't make sense. The universe cannot exist without a determinant.
Chance isn't a powerful enough, or reasonable determining factor.... for me. God just makes more sense as a determinant in my opinion.

If this objection applies at all, then in my opinion, it applies to everything else just as well.

anything and everything.

Height?