bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 11:00 am
Time has existed since the beginning of time does not mean that time began to exist.
I thought I'd chime in.
RE the thread title: "Infinite regress is logically impossible"
I agree, and again will explain why and also answer the question in the quote above.
First, time is only the occurrence of an event. If there is no event occurring, then there is no time. So our reality, at its most finite perceivable scale, that even our technology cannot delve (yet - see the BTW below) - getting towards the Planck scale, gets down to the itsy-bitsy of either there IS an event or NOT an event, binary.
No, time is not the occurrence of an event. Time is a substance that allows change.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 2:42 pm
I'm sorry...I'm not trying to insult you, but you've really mixed up your language here. You might want to rethink that claim. Time does not consist of objects, so time does not literally "change." It's the interval within which things can change from one state to another, but it's the things, not time itself, that undergoes the changes.
Of course time changes. How could you have change if time does not change?
Time does not "change." It "passes," while remaining exactly what it is. That's very, very different.
Time is the span, the interval, during which a change (in some state, object or substance) takes place. But it's the object that undergoes the changes, not time itself. Time is an interval, not an object.
RE the thread title: "Infinite regress is logically impossible"
I agree, and again will explain why and also answer the question in the quote above.
First, time is only the occurrence of an event. If there is no event occurring, then there is no time. So our reality, at its most finite perceivable scale, that even our technology cannot delve (yet - see the BTW below) - getting towards the Planck scale, gets down to the itsy-bitsy of either there IS an event or NOT an event, binary.
No, time is not the occurrence of an event. Time is a substance that allows change.
U R basically saying that time is cause.
U R A FUCKING DIK HED.
No, that is the mind that causes changes. Without time no change is possible though.
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 3:05 pm
Of course time changes. How could you have change if time does not change?
Time does not "change." It "passes," while remaining exactly what it is. That's very, very different.
Time is the span, the interval, during which a change (in some state, object or substance) takes place. But it's the object that undergoes the changes, not time itself. Time is an interval, not an object.
What do you mean with passes?
Time describes an interval, a chronological space between things, not itself a thing. As such, it does not "change," if we use "change" in the same sense that we speak of people "changing" or mountains "changing" or any other such thing. Time itself has always been exactly what it is, since it began and until now. It's the interval during which the changes of other objects and states take place.
So it "passes" purely in a durational sense, not in terms of changing to become something other than time.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 8:25 pm
Time does not "change." It "passes," while remaining exactly what it is. That's very, very different.
Time is the span, the interval, during which a change (in some state, object or substance) takes place. But it's the object that undergoes the changes, not time itself. Time is an interval, not an object.
What do you mean with passes?
Time describes an interval, a chronological space between things, not itself a thing. As such, it does not "change," if we use "change" in the same sense that we speak of people "changing" or mountains "changing" or any other such thing. Time itself has always been exactly what it is, since it began and until now. It's the interval during which the changes of other objects and states take place.
So it "passes" purely in a durational sense, not in terms of changing to become something other than time.
I didn't say that time changes to something else. It however changes otherwise it could not accommodate different stances of material.
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 8:31 pm
What do you mean with passes?
Time describes an interval, a chronological space between things, not itself a thing. As such, it does not "change," if we use "change" in the same sense that we speak of people "changing" or mountains "changing" or any other such thing. Time itself has always been exactly what it is, since it began and until now. It's the interval during which the changes of other objects and states take place.
So it "passes" purely in a durational sense, not in terms of changing to become something other than time.
I didn't say that time changes to something else. It however changes otherwise it could not accommodate different stances of material.
I don't know how else to say it to you. Time remains time. Time passes, but is still nothing but time. Different "material," to use your word, does change, because it declines. And it does so during the passage of time. But time remains what it is.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 8:37 pm
Time describes an interval, a chronological space between things, not itself a thing. As such, it does not "change," if we use "change" in the same sense that we speak of people "changing" or mountains "changing" or any other such thing. Time itself has always been exactly what it is, since it began and until now. It's the interval during which the changes of other objects and states take place.
So it "passes" purely in a durational sense, not in terms of changing to become something other than time.
I didn't say that time changes to something else. It however changes otherwise it could not accommodate different stances of material.
I don't know how else to say it to you. Time remains time. Time passes, but is still nothing but time. Different "material," to use your word, does change, because it declines. And it does so during the passage of time. But time remains what it is.
Time changes or not. Take your pick. I have an argument for time changes.
I don't know how else to say it to you. Time remains time. Time passes, but is still nothing but time. Different "material," to use your word, does change, because it declines. And it does so during the passage of time. But time remains what it is.
Time changes or not. Take your pick. I have an argument for time changes.
How do you get "time changes" out of what I said, above?
I don't know how else to say it to you. Time remains time. Time passes, but is still nothing but time. Different "material," to use your word, does change, because it declines. And it does so during the passage of time. But time remains what it is.
Time changes or not. Take your pick. I have an argument for time changes.
How do you get "time changes" out of what I said, above?
You keep talking about the passage of time not being aware that passage and change are the same thing. By the way, are you interested to know my argument?
attofishpi wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 3:08 am
The red bit is nonsense. TIME does not exist beyond being a man-made construct where we can measure EVENTS.
Explain how, where there are NO events, how are you going to have TIME?
I was not the one who claimed that there cannot be a time when there is no event. That was you. I have my argument for time when change happens.
Ya, I know, but you haven't answered my question. How does time exist if no events are occurring?
attofishpi wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 3:08 am
The red bit is nonsense. TIME does not exist beyond being a man-made construct where we can measure EVENTS.
Explain how, where there are NO events, how are you going to have TIME?
I was not the one who claimed that there cannot be a time when there is no event. That was you. I have my argument for time when change happens.
Ya, I know, but you haven't answered my question. How does time exist if no events are occurring?
I can prove that time is necessary if change happens. The burden of proof is on you to prove that there is no time if there is no event.
