Guest Valk0010 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Christians often talk about what was the cause of the universe, debate time passed later, they bring up that there cause has to be eternal. But that brings up the question, did time exist prior to the big bang. If time didn't exist pre big bang, then how can something be eternal and not die, if there is no reference in that realm to say he is going to be there always. If there was time pre big bang, there is a reason why I make this argument particularly, because a christian would say the matter used in the big bang was created and caused. What are you thoughts, I don't know a lot about cosmology, but just had that thought about the big bang. I am just throwing around the idea in my head at this point, so this is not some grand argument on my part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Christians often talk about what was the cause of the universe, debate time passed later, they bring up that there cause has to be eternal. But that brings up the question, did time exist prior to the big bang. If time didn't exist pre big bang, then how can something be eternal and not die, if there is no reference in that realm to say he is going to be there always. If there was time pre big bang, there is a reason why I make this argument particularly, because a christian would say the matter used in the big bang was created and caused. What are you thoughts, I don't know a lot about cosmology, but just had that thought about the big bang. I don't think science has anything to say about the conditions prior to the Big Bang (please someone correct me if I am wrong). My personal feeling is that the universe is oscillating - coming into existence and out of it. But I don't have proof. Time is very strange and I don't think such a thing exists outside of a human mind (or something close to one) to comprehend it. Even then, don't you think it is a very slippery thing? Time seems to pass very slowly when your life is eventful (youth) and very fast the older you get. Its just strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overcame Faith Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Time is very strange and I don't think such a thing exists outside of a human mind (or something close to one) to comprehend it. Even then, don't you think it is a very slippery thing? Time seems to pass very slowly when your life is eventful (youth) and very fast the older you get. Its just strange. I agree that time as such has no separate and distinct existence. Time measures change, it does not cause change. If there is no change to measure then there is no time. If there is change to measure, then there is time. But this idea of Einstein's that there is this fabric of space-time as if time was something that existed like a flowing river is in my humble opinion an incorrect way to look at it with all due respect to the wild haired genius. There is no such thing as time. No time travel. No time reversals. No gaining of time if we travel fast enough and no slowing of time the stronger the gravitational effect. None of that. But then again, I've never even taken a physics course. So what do I know. I need more time to think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherJosh Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? I'm not really sure, it's definitely an interesting concept. But if we view time as something related to space or spacetime it would be a part of the universe so it wouldn't exist apart from the universe meaning the universe was the origin of time, so there wasn't a time before the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted February 3, 2011 Moderator Share Posted February 3, 2011 If one of the definitions of time is 'deterioration' - then wouldn't time begin at the moment of the big bang to the ending of .....? Forget it - I don't know what I'm tryin' to say. the topic of time always makes me want to drink again........................................ lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Valk0010 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? I'm not really sure, it's definitely an interesting concept. But if we view time as something related to space or spacetime it would be a part of the universe so it wouldn't exist apart from the universe meaning the universe was the origin of time, so there wasn't a time before the universe. I would say the idea of a time before the universe is only a problem for a theist. I just got my first lesson every in Einstein's theory of relativity last night, so blame that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? I'm not really sure, it's definitely an interesting concept. But if we view time as something related to space or spacetime it would be a part of the universe so it wouldn't exist apart from the universe meaning the universe was the origin of time, so there wasn't a time before the universe. I would say the idea of a time before the universe is only a problem for a theist. I just got my first lesson every in Einstein's theory of relativity last night, so blame that. If the theist says "God is outside of time" how is that a problem for them? Whether there is or is not time would not matter, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted February 3, 2011 Moderator Share Posted February 3, 2011 To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? I'm not really sure, it's definitely an interesting concept. But if we view time as something related to space or spacetime it would be a part of the universe so it wouldn't exist apart from the universe meaning the universe was the origin of time, so there wasn't a time before the universe. I would say the idea of a time before the universe is only a problem for a theist. I just got my first lesson every in Einstein's theory of relativity last night, so blame that. Please Valk, explain this slowly and simply to my grade 9 brains - .I so want to understand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted February 3, 2011 Super Moderator Share Posted February 3, 2011 If a thing exists outside of time, then "eternity" would have no meaning to it. It probably couldn't understand time any better than we can understand "not time." There are many volumes written on the subject, not all in agreement. I find it an interesting subject for speculation; and speculate is all we can do, really. I'm no physicist but I have a guess, too. I think perhaps time is a dimension we need along with the other dimensions we have access to. We need the idea of time to make sense of things. But I suspect that everything essentially happens at once, though we don't perceive it that way. Woo woo anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
★ Citsonga ★ Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Time is very strange and I don't think such a thing exists outside of a human mind (or something close to one) to comprehend it. I agree that time as such has no separate and distinct existence. Time measures change, it does not cause change. To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? "Time" is not an entity, it has no matter, and I see it as nothing more than a concept. We are always in the "now," and "time" is just an idea our minds have constructed to understand a succession of events. Some ask about "time before time began," but that seems rather pointless to me because time is not something physical that can be made or created or whatever, it's just a concept. That's my two cents, for what it's worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Valk0010 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? I'm not really sure, it's definitely an interesting concept. But if we view time as something related to space or spacetime it would be a part of the universe so it wouldn't exist apart from the universe meaning the universe was the origin of time, so there wasn't a time before the universe. I would say the idea of a time before the universe is only a problem for a theist. I just got my first lesson ever in Einstein's theory of relativity last night, so blame that. Please Valk, explain this slowly and simply to my grade 9 brains - .I so want to understand! I don't get it very well myself personally, and I wasn't intending to be condescending, relativity is just part of the reason I thought of this. But the relevant nugget of information as related to this topic as I understood, its how time and speed are actually different at different speeds. So say you have a rocket ship going really close to the speed of light, time will actually go slower then the in other areas. So just to make up a number for the sake of explanation because I honestly can't think of any exact ratio for this of the top of my head, say it takes 10 years of time to get from a to b going near the speed of light. 100 feet away a thousand years has gone by. Now if nothing exists, there is nothing like relativity. And there is nothing to base any physical difference like in relatively of either. There is just nothing there to see as aging. If nothing exists, do the things that create time still exist. And how can we base any claims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skepticalme Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 There was no time "prior" to the Big Bang. Both time and space came into existance at the moment of the Big Bang. In fact, that is what the Big Bang is, the expansion of space and time. This expansion of time is what causes time to move forward in one direction from past to future. Massive objects curve space (gravity) distorting this expansion and time dilates as a result. This can be measured by the GPS satellite system. Time on Earth's surface passes more slowly than it does in orbit. As a result, the location that the GPS in your car indicates you are at would drift by several miles a day if left uncorrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Christians often talk about what was the cause of the universe, debate time passed later, they bring up that there cause has to be eternal. But that brings up the question, did time exist prior to the big bang. If time didn't exist pre big bang, then how can something be eternal and not die, if there is no reference in that realm to say he is going to be there always. If there was time pre big bang, there is a reason why I make this argument particularly, because a christian would say the matter used in the big bang was created and caused. What are you thoughts, I don't know a lot about cosmology, but just had that thought about the big bang. I am just throwing around the idea in my head at this point, so this is not some grand argument on my part. Q. When you arrive at the North pole can you go any further north? A.............. ? No, don't answer that one, Valk! Some questions (like what came 'before' time) just can't be answered in any sensible way and, imho, there's little point in trying to do so. I'm a Multiversalist. (See the thread, 'Multiverse... anyone?', in the Science vs. Religion section) If Christian apologists want to play the 'eternal cause' card, I just throw their gambit right back at them, citing the growing body of scientific evidence that there was no beginning. God isn't eternal, reality is. We are just a microscopic and not particularly special part of an infinite and eternally-existing multiversal reality, just like our tiny and run-of-the-mill universe. So, there's no need to get involved in any mind-boggling arguments about what came before what. Given infinite time and infinite opportunities, we were bound to exist. Game over! BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thackerie Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 ... My personal feeling is that the universe is oscillating - coming into existence and out of it. But I don't have proof. Time is very strange and I don't think such a thing exists outside of a human mind (or something close to one) to comprehend it. Even then, don't you think it is a very slippery thing? Time seems to pass very slowly when your life is eventful (youth) and very fast the older you get. Its just strange. ... I'm no physicist but I have a guess, too. I think perhaps time is a dimension we need along with the other dimensions we have access to. We need the idea of time to make sense of things. But I suspect that everything essentially happens at once, though we don't perceive it that way. Woo woo anyone? Yes, absolute woo woo. Pure speculation. BUT, I agree with both possibilities — a revolving universe that goes in and out of existence on a continually repeated loop AND that everything happens at once. I have thought about these ideas many, many times. (But I just thought, that's me being weird; I didn't know others have the same speculation.) I know what Deva and florduh mean ... but I don't have any science to back them up. Nor do I even have the words to express these ideas accurately. I can't explain it, but I don't think time moves in a linear fashion as we perceive it. Terrible Joke Warning: My old biology professor used to say, "Time flies like an arrow. ... Fruit flies like a banana." (Well, I guess you had to be there.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Terrible Joke Warning: My old biology professor used to say, "Time flies like an arrow. ... Fruit flies like a banana." (Well, I guess you had to be there.) That's my kind of joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathlene Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? I'm not really sure, it's definitely an interesting concept. But if we view time as something related to space or spacetime it would be a part of the universe so it wouldn't exist apart from the universe meaning the universe was the origin of time, so there wasn't a time before the universe. I know some flash scientist could answer me this ...I know its easy to divide an hour into minutes, a minute is 60seconds, but how long is a second??? How on earth did they work out that small unit of time to be the basis of all time and how do you get a machine to click it in perfect sync to be the exact time between a second? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thackerie Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 To an extent I think time is a human construct in how we view the world and process it. We view events within the context of a forward linear progression of time. We use time as a way to measure something such as seconds and minutes but is time a "thing"? I'm not really sure, it's definitely an interesting concept. But if we view time as something related to space or spacetime it would be a part of the universe so it wouldn't exist apart from the universe meaning the universe was the origin of time, so there wasn't a time before the universe. I know some flash scientist could answer me this ...I know its easy to divide an hour into minutes, a minute is 60seconds, but how long is a second??? How on earth did they work out that small unit of time to be the basis of all time and how do you get a machine to click it in perfect sync to be the exact time between a second? Wikipedia has an article on the history and meaning of “seond” at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second in which we learn that “Since 1967, the second has been defined to be the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.” That refers to the atomic lock, and, frankly, it's over my head. But there's information in the article that is worth checking out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overcame Faith Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Wikipedia has an article on the history and meaning of “seond” at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second in which we learn that “Since 1967, the second has been defined to be the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.” That refers to the atomic lock, and, frankly, it's over my head. But there's information in the article that is worth checking out. Yeah, that's always been my working definition of a second. Actually, the correct definition of a second is the amount of time it takes to say, "one one hundred" with subsequent seconds counted as follows: "two one hundred, three one hundred," etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 If a thing exists outside of time, then "eternity" would have no meaning to it. It probably couldn't understand time any better than we can understand "not time." God isn't eternal, reality is. Florduh would be right. The word "eternal" is a word we use in reference to time, in a time-based language. It's like the word infinite. I prefer the word timeless rather than eternal. And yes if you exist in a timeless state, then time has no meaning, as it doesn't exist. All that is just is. So when BA says "God isn't eternal, reality is", then reality is Reality, or God. The placing of God in reference to time is anthropomorphic. Reality IS. Time are simply finite points of reference, like matter. We are just a microscopic and not particularly special part of an infinite and eternally-existing multiversal reality, just like our tiny and run-of-the-mill universe. I'm not sure I'd dismiss our specialness because we're not large or spectacular. This is measuring value on a scale of how we perceive value. Every single spec in every single "moment" is "eternally" significant, to use that language. So, there's no need to get involved in any mind-boggling arguments about what came before what. Given infinite time and infinite opportunities, we were bound to exist. Sounds to me like a Creative Reality. Game over! And begins. Now to add some thoughts to human reference of time that might be of interest for discussion. Anthropologically speaking human's understanding, views of reality in regard to time has shifted over the course of our evolution. As early man roamed as hunter/gatherer, there was no thought to next year, next season, or even next week. It was next day, eat, stay alive, survive. The sense of self was earth-bound, the cycle of eating and surviving, one with the eco-system. As agricultural societies developed, the view of their reality in relation to time shifted to a cyclical reality. Live till next season, plan, store, end and begin again with the rise of the new cycle. Time was cyclical. Self was identified as part of this cycle of seasons. Then as societies began to accumulate and distribute wealth and power, man's view of himself shifted to his domain, the sense of his own continuation into the years, symbolically linked to his power, his name, his wealth, his domain. Man became king of his own castle, and his "self" continued through his children, his heirs, etc. He now viewed himself in time as a linear line, from the present into the long distant future beyond just the next cycle. A continuation of self symbolically linked to linear time. Then with the rise of religious myths, that sense of "self" projected onto a linear view of time, took the form of eternal cities, a continuation of life on earth. A celestial paradise where they would never die, and all of it rooted in man's sense of self in ideas of time. In my view, there is only now, timeless Reality. This is "eternity" and there is no after or before. Everything in human experience and perception of time has to do with their sense of a separate "self". At the end of self, death of that distinction, is in fact to dissolve time into the present, into simple Reality, or Being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Another view of time: A closed system increases in entropy (roughly, disorder.) Time is a measure of this increasing disorder. Units of time are based on decay of radioactive elements, or their increase in disorder. Time is just a way of measuring disorder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Another view of time: A closed system increases in entropy (roughly, disorder.) Time is a measure of this increasing disorder. Units of time are based on decay of radioactive elements, or their increase in disorder. Time is just a way of measuring disorder. Don't we also measure it in increasing order as well, such as the birth of the universe to the formation of galaxies, or the developmental stages of growth in a child, and so forth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Another view of time: A closed system increases in entropy (roughly, disorder.) Time is a measure of this increasing disorder. Units of time are based on decay of radioactive elements, or their increase in disorder. Time is just a way of measuring disorder. Don't we also measure it in increasing order as well, such as the birth of the universe to the formation of galaxies, or the developmental stages of growth in a child, and so forth? A closed system always increases in entropy. Closed is key. (2nd law of Thermodynamics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted February 3, 2011 Moderator Share Posted February 3, 2011 Another view of time: A closed system increases in entropy (roughly, disorder.) Time is a measure of this increasing disorder. Units of time are based on decay of radioactive elements, or their increase in disorder. Time is just a way of measuring disorder. yeah,yeah... That's it Par! That's what I was trying to describe when I used the word 'deterioration'! I knew someone would help me! And on your birthday at that! Thanks!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Another view of time: A closed system increases in entropy (roughly, disorder.) Time is a measure of this increasing disorder. Units of time are based on decay of radioactive elements, or their increase in disorder. Time is just a way of measuring disorder. Don't we also measure it in increasing order as well, such as the birth of the universe to the formation of galaxies, or the developmental stages of growth in a child, and so forth? A closed system always increases in entropy. Closed is key. (2nd law of Thermodynamics) So nothing tends towards order anywhere in the universe, where we speak of time in that direction, as in the examples I gave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 As I understand it, not without outside input. Earth gets energy input constantly from the sun. Living things increase order by taking in energy and converting it to matter (growth) and work. Photosynthesis is the most efficient energy/matter conversion method known. As soon as the energy transfer ceases, disorder strikes again (decomp.) Galaxies are in a constant state of decay from energy to matter. I get the feeling you're very familiar with the laws of thermodynamics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts