- #36
Mike2
- 1,313
- 0
Actually, I wasn't arguing against time being infinite. I was only arguing against space being infinite because it would either take an infinite time to get that big or it would have to be created all in an instant. In either case any understanding of how things evolved would be lost in a infinite progression into the past.SpaceTiger said:Mike, I think it's pretty presumptuous to assume that our traditional notions of cause and effect apply to the beginning of time. Even if they did, I don't see any reason why the "cause" should have to exist in our spacetime. If either of those assumptions were wrong, so would be your conclusions.
It's really a waste of time to debate about it, though. We have about as much proof and understanding of an initial singularity as we do of God. Let's focus on those things that can conceivably be observed in the near future.
I do make an exception: that the universe started in the infinite past at an infinitesimal size. If the exponential expansion of inflation is true, then exponentials decrease to zero only in the infinite past. With no, or very little structure presumed at the infinitesimally small, cause and effect is not lost in instant complexity.