There was a beginning

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Scott Mayers
Posts: 2112
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: There was a beginning

Post by Scott Mayers »

AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:54 am
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 1:52 am Heat death is the final state of any close system eventually. This is due to the second law of thermodynamics that states that entropy (disorder) increases in any close system. We are not in heat death therefore there was a beginning.
How does this follow? I don't see your point...
And how would you know that a a few billion years from now there wouldn't be a "heat death" occurring?
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 1:52 am There are two scenarios for the eternal past (eternal past being whatever that exists in past): 1) One can reach from the eternal past to now or 2) One cannot. In the first case, we have a beginning since we just need to look at the past to see the eternal past. In the second case, we cannot reach from the eternal past to now, therefore, there is no beginning. We however are at now. Therefore there is no eternal past. Therefore the second case is wrong. We are left with (1) that is plausible. Therefore, there is a beginning.
How can something that is "eternal" have a beginning?
As I see it, the term "eternal X" means that X has no end - and as such it also means: X has no beginning (a coin has two sides, you can't have a one sided coin, can you?).

Furthermore: How would one "reach from" the past to now?
You cannot live in the past - you can only think about the past, but also thinking always happens now.
You cannot escape now, no matter how much you think about past or future - and basing a theory on the capacity to remember past events, is no proof for or against an absolute beginning (while yes, you may postulate some conceptual "proof" for a limited thing "beginning" at some time in the imaginary past - eg once you were born and now you are alive here/now - but in truth, even this body didn't really have a beginning - it didn't just pop into existence from nothing).

I believe it is a mistake to believe that one can proof that some thing has a beginning (or and end) and the mistake just amplifies if this "thing" has been awarded with attributes such as eternal or infinite.
I argue that this is possible and probable but based upon an understanding of what Absolute Nothingness means. See my Proof that Absolutely Nothing absolutely exists as an 'origin'.... Although the concept, 'origin', can be misleading, once you understand how an absolute nothing exists as the background PRIOR to space and time, then it 'originates' reality based upon nothing at all AND does so without bias to starting with 'laws' at that point.
AlexW
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: There was a beginning

Post by AlexW »

Scott Mayers wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 3:40 am Although the concept, 'origin', can be misleading, once you understand how an absolute nothing exists as the background PRIOR to space and time, then it 'originates' reality based upon nothing at all
There is no way to understand "how an absolute nothing exists" - if you try and attempt it, all you achieve is that you objectify this "absolute nothingness" and turn it into a limited some-thing.
No concept - not even existence or non-existence - can apply to "absolute nothing", thus, whatever you say about it, will never be "it" (and this includes your idea of origination "based upon nothing at all")
Scott Mayers
Posts: 2112
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: There was a beginning

Post by Scott Mayers »

AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 4:33 am
Scott Mayers wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 3:40 am Although the concept, 'origin', can be misleading, once you understand how an absolute nothing exists as the background PRIOR to space and time, then it 'originates' reality based upon nothing at all
There is no way to understand "how an absolute nothing exists" - if you try and attempt it, all you achieve is that you objectify this "absolute nothingness" and turn it into a limited some-thing.
No concept - not even existence or non-existence - can apply to "absolute nothing", thus, whatever you say about it, will never be "it" (and this includes your idea of origination "based upon nothing at all")
I am sufficiently confident that what I say is correct but difficult for most to understand. Begin by asking yourself what reality could mean if it has some apriori 'law'? If you are not religious, as I am not, then how can anything exist without some prior mind to expect laws must be 'obeyed', with regards to physics. While it may not be SATIFACTORY for you to agree without being able to present nothingness, this is nevertheless minimalized to what Totality would be without bias. Even if you believed in some 'god', then the question of its own causation has to rely on some concept of 'nothing'. If you presume ANYTHING 'special', as in a fixed set of laws, then this still reduces to a form of religious thinking to me.

The safest bet, if you cannot be satisfied, is to POSTULATE absolutely nothing, which is identical to permitting ALL things possible with respect to Totality (not merely our particular Universe). My argument is a metaphyical/metalogical one.
AlexW
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: There was a beginning

Post by AlexW »

Scott Mayers wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 4:47 am Begin by asking yourself what reality could mean if it has some apriori 'law'?
As I see it, there is only one way to experience reality: with the senses
All you actually can do is to see, hear, smell, taste and feel/touch "reality" - this is what I would call: direct experience (DE)
Now one can think about this DE, interpret what has been sensed and erect a conceptual structure on top of what actually has been directly experienced.
Reality is this direct experience - there is no other reality that one could know (yes, one can think about a different realty - eg some kind of absolute nothingness - but this doesn't make it real, it still belongs to the world of concepts, which are actually never directly experienced, but only imagined)
Scott Mayers wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 4:47 am If you are not religious, as I am not, then how can anything exist without some prior mind to expect laws must be 'obeyed'
I am not religious and I also do not believe that anything exists as some separately existing, independent thing - all that "exists" (and I am only using this term as there seems to be no better one) is what is present here/now as directly experienced reality - all else is simply "thought up".

This is the case for all separate things - eg: apple. You can not directly experience this apple, all you have is a certain visual impression - the field of colors - but this visual impression does not contain separate things/objects, it only contains color, its as simple as that.
That one set/pattern of colors is an apple and another a pear is not part of DE, it is part of the conceptual overlay which we employ to make sense of the world, but this doesn't mean that underlying reality has any meaning at all...
Age
Posts: 6256
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: There was a beginning

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 7:34 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 3:35 am
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:26 pm
Yes.
Thank you. That is ALL the PROOF needed here.
So you agree that my proof is correct? Or it does not matter to you anymore.
What 'you' are DOING, (and MISSING), here is that your OWN words here are PROVING my CLAIMS, about how the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY work, to be absolutely True, Right, AND Correct.

So again, thank you.
Dontaskme
Posts: 9563
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by Dontaskme »

Scott Mayers wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 4:47 am
The safest bet, if you cannot be satisfied, is to POSTULATE absolutely nothing, which is identical to permitting ALL things possible with respect to Totality (not merely our particular Universe). My argument is a metaphyical/metalogical one.
I totally get what you are saying here.

In the sense that Absolute nothingness is identical to all things possible, ie: totality, ie: everything, ie: something.

I agree with you Scott, either we see this or we don't. We don't even have to explain it or put it into words, it is already what we are in essence, we can know this nothingness if we dig deep enough, if we let go of the usual one sided focus on the dream image to realise the screen on which the image is seen and known.

Attempting to show the screen using concepts will not be the screen. As every interpretation of it will appear to cloud over the clarity of it, and is probably what Alex is referring to that when using concepts to see the nothingness is not possible. Thing is, we cannot see or know the nothingness directly, because we already are the direct seeing and knowing nothing and everything simultaneously. We can understand the apparent split is purely illusional.

In true Vedanta style, we can never touch the true and real essence of who we are without creating what appears to be an opposing paradox. Only through the silence of being which of course is the empty backlight of pure awareness which without no knowledge can be revealed to be known and seen ie: the dream. In essence, there is only the dream, only the dream exists.

Sorry, just more word salad for the curious mind. :wink:
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 4674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by bahman »

AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:54 am
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 1:52 am Heat death is the final state of any close system eventually. This is due to the second law of thermodynamics that states that entropy (disorder) increases in any close system. We are not in heat death therefore there was a beginning.
How does this follow? I don't see your point...
The amount of time that requires that we reach from the beginning to heat death, let's call it T. We are not in heat death therefore we are somewhere between the beginning and heat death. We would be in the state of heat death if there was no beginning. That is true that because T is finite and infinite past is infinite.
AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:54 am And how would you know that a a few billion years from now there wouldn't be a "heat death" occurring?
We certainly reach the state of heat death. When? Very long according to physicists.
AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:54 am
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 1:52 am There are two scenarios for the eternal past (eternal past being whatever that exists in past): 1) One can reach from the eternal past to now or 2) One cannot. In the first case, we have a beginning since we just need to look at the past to see the eternal past. In the second case, we cannot reach from the eternal past to now, therefore, there is no beginning. We however are at now. Therefore there is no eternal past. Therefore the second case is wrong. We are left with (1) that is plausible. Therefore, there is a beginning.
How can something that is "eternal" have a beginning?
As I see it, the term "eternal X" means that X has no end - and as such it also means: X has no beginning (a coin has two sides, you can't have a one sided coin, can you?).
I defined "the eternal past" as whatever existed in the past which might have a beginning or not.
AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:54 am Furthermore: How would one "reach from" the past to now?
By reaching I mean that we were in the past and then reach to now.
AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:54 am You cannot live in the past - you can only think about the past, but also thinking always happens now.
You cannot escape now, no matter how much you think about past or future - and basing a theory on the capacity to remember past events, is no proof for or against an absolute beginning (while yes, you may postulate some conceptual "proof" for a limited thing "beginning" at some time in the imaginary past - eg once you were born and now you are alive here/now - but in truth, even this body didn't really have a beginning - it didn't just pop into existence from nothing).
Yes, we live here and now.
AlexW wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:54 am I believe it is a mistake to believe that one can proof that some thing has a beginning (or and end) and the mistake just amplifies if this "thing" has been awarded with attributes such as eternal or infinite.
It is not.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 4674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 10:34 am
bahman wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 7:34 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 3:35 am

Thank you. That is ALL the PROOF needed here.
So you agree that my proof is correct? Or it does not matter to you anymore.
What 'you' are DOING, (and MISSING), here is that your OWN words here are PROVING my CLAIMS, about how the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY work, to be absolutely True, Right, AND Correct.

So again, thank you.
Cool.
AlexW
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: There was a beginning

Post by AlexW »

bahman wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:20 pm We are not in heat death therefore we are somewhere between the beginning and heat death.
This might be true if the system were closed... but is it?
As I see it, a "closed system" is not more than an ideal state that scientists attempt to achieve when conducting experiments, but in reality there is only one "system" - reality itself - and this system is not closed or limited.
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:20 pm I defined "the eternal past" as whatever existed in the past which might have a beginning or not.
Well... if it doesn't have a beginning then wouldn't it be more precise to refer to it as the "eternal now"?
Now ask yourself: Does the "eternal now" have a beginning?
Of course not - its always now, right?

You seem to believe that "the past" is something that is not now, that it has some kind of existence outside of conceptual structures of thought...
But it really is only a story appearing in/as thought - and the story/the past is no more once thought stops...pretty fragile, isn't it?
DPMartin
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:11 am

Re: There was a beginning

Post by DPMartin »

bahman wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 1:52 am There are two proofs for this. A) The physical argument (the second law of thermodynamics) and B) The metaphysical one (the logical one).

Proof of A: Heat death is the final state of any close system eventually. This is due to the second law of thermodynamics that states that entropy (disorder) increases in any close system. We are not in heat death therefore there was a beginning.

Proof of B: There are two scenarios for the eternal past (eternal past being whatever that exists in past): 1) One can reach from the eternal past to now or 2) One cannot. In the first case, we have a beginning since we just need to look at the past to see the eternal past. In the second case, we cannot reach from the eternal past to now, therefore, there is no beginning. We however are at now. Therefore there is no eternal past. Therefore the second case is wrong. We are left with (1) that is plausible. Therefore, there is a beginning.
sounds like a bunch of jibber jabber, people of any interest in "the beginning" have been trying to prove one way or the other for centuries. you pull the answer out of your hat like a rabbit that's put together like you've been hitting the bong to much and you expect what?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 4674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by bahman »

AlexW wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 2:01 am
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:20 pm We are not in heat death therefore we are somewhere between the beginning and heat death.
This might be true if the system were closed... but is it?
As I see it, a "closed system" is not more than an ideal state that scientists attempt to achieve when conducting experiments, but in reality there is only one "system" - reality itself - and this system is not closed or limited.
The whole is certainly closed since there is nothing left to interact with externally.
AlexW wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 2:01 am
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:20 pm I defined "the eternal past" as whatever existed in the past which might have a beginning or not.
Well... if it doesn't have a beginning then wouldn't it be more precise to refer to it as the "eternal now"?
Now ask yourself: Does the "eternal now" have a beginning?
Of course not - its always now, right?

You seem to believe that "the past" is something that is not now, that it has some kind of existence outside of conceptual structures of thought...
But it really is only a story appearing in/as thought - and the story/the past is no more once thought stops...pretty fragile, isn't it?
Eternal now is the simultaneous states which cannot be real since the subject exists in different states.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 4674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by bahman »

DPMartin wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 4:40 pm
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 1:52 am There are two proofs for this. A) The physical argument (the second law of thermodynamics) and B) The metaphysical one (the logical one).

Proof of A: Heat death is the final state of any close system eventually. This is due to the second law of thermodynamics that states that entropy (disorder) increases in any close system. We are not in heat death therefore there was a beginning.

Proof of B: There are two scenarios for the eternal past (eternal past being whatever that exists in past): 1) One can reach from the eternal past to now or 2) One cannot. In the first case, we have a beginning since we just need to look at the past to see the eternal past. In the second case, we cannot reach from the eternal past to now, therefore, there is no beginning. We however are at now. Therefore there is no eternal past. Therefore the second case is wrong. We are left with (1) that is plausible. Therefore, there is a beginning.
sounds like a bunch of jibber jabber, people of any interest in "the beginning" have been trying to prove one way or the other for centuries. you pull the answer out of your hat like a rabbit that's put together like you've been hitting the bong to much and you expect what?
Do you have any problem with my arguments?
commonsense
Posts: 3303
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by commonsense »

Yes. You are confusing belief with proof. Your beliefs are hard held, heartfelt claims.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 4674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by bahman »

commonsense wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 6:44 pm Yes. You are confusing belief with proof. Your beliefs are hard held, heartfelt claims.
Could you please tell me what I am trying to say?
commonsense
Posts: 3303
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: There was a beginning

Post by commonsense »

bahman wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 6:52 pm
commonsense wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 6:44 pm Yes. You are confusing belief with proof. Your beliefs are hard held, heartfelt claims.
Could you please tell me what I am trying to say?
One thing you have been trying to say is that time once had a starting point.
Post Reply