If God exists then Infinity does not exist

For the love of the pursuit of knowledge

Moderator: Moderators

jgh7

If God exists then Infinity does not exist

Post #1

Post by jgh7 »

Does this make sense?

1) Infinity is that which has no end.
2) It is impossible to reach the end of something with no end.
3) God can do everything that is possible to do in existence.
4) If God can't do something, then that something does not actually exist, for if it did exist then God could do it.
5) God can not reach the end of infinity for infinity has no end.
6 conclusion) An actual infinity does not exist if God exists.

Consequence: Everything in existence must have a beginning (infinitely back in time does not exist) and end (infinitely forwad in time does not exist) if God exists. Since God would also be part of existence, He must have a beginning and an end as well.

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post #51

Post by mgb »

TSGracchus wrote: Eternity, like nothing, does not exist. Time is a minimum distance between points, a magnitude always greater than zero. If "s" is distance and "t" is time then t = s/c, where "c" is equal to the speed of light in a vacuum. Whether we see that distance as time or as a spatial distance depends on the frame of reference. And since the universe is expanding, we perceive that time is relative to the gravitational field or acceleration.

So, eternity is not "all of time" any more the infinity is all of distance. It is really kind of hard to explain without referencing point-set topology and multi-dimensional differentiable sub-space manifolds.
'Change' as a definition of time is not enough. Change is merely evidence of time. Time (more correctly spacetime) is that order according to which change happens. In physical terms General Relativity is the closest description we have of that order. Time is not merely measurement or change, it is the way change happens.

TSGracchus
Scholar
Posts: 345
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #52

Post by TSGracchus »

[Replying to post 51 by mgb]

mgb: "Change' as a definition of time is not enough."

I did not define time as change. We measure time and space by comparison. The difference is the change.

mgb: "Change is merely evidence of time. Time (more correctly spacetime) is that order according to which change happens. In physical terms General Relativity is the closest description we have of that order. Time is not merely measurement or change, it is the way change happens."

But time is not a constant. It depends on your frame of reference. What is invariant is "c" (the speed of light).



If you restrict yourself to your own frame of reference, with your spacial position (0, 0, 0) and your temporal position (now) also 0, then because of the expansion of the universe everything else changes relative to you. Time is just the comparison of changes between two points.
Think of space-time as four coordinates and every possible point will have associated with it a definite vector. In that frame of reference there is and can be no change.
Or consider a vector (x, y). You can plot your velocity as the change in time in each dimension (dx/dt, dy/dt), but time is just a convenient parameter, and you can also just plot (dx/dy, dy/dx) leaving time out of your calculations altogether.

And consider that x and y are not real but complex values. To really understand we are going to have to consider complex numbers, and quaternions, and understand a bit of Clifford algebras.

Time is just a convenient parameter. All changes are relative to differing points in space.

:study:

Post Reply