If it is possible that the universe is the mind of a higher consciousness as I put-forth in my "Burning Bush" thread, then the "spacetime" aspect of this universe is "bounded" in the same way that your own mind is bounded.bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 12, 2024 12:22 pmWell, spacetime is fundamental and it is boundless.seeds wrote: ↑Fri Jan 12, 2024 1:35 amYou told me that you read the OP of my "Burning Bush" thread, in which case, you already know my stance regarding the ontology of the universe.
However, coming at this from the perspective of hardcore materialism, this image we've been discussing...
...is a visual representation of a bubble of reality that, at this present moment (and based on pre-James Webb telescope discoveries), is estimated to be approximately 93 billion light-years in diameter.
We're talking about a 93 billion light-year in diameter bubble of reality that, approximately 13.8 billion years ago, was allegedly (and literally) smaller than the tiny dot between these two brackets [.].
And the point is that the blackened area of the above image, along with the blackened area in the following gif that depicts the moment when the infinitesimal singularity [.] began expanding,...
...are both visual representations of whatever it is that is forever making room (relenting/giving-way/opening up, etc.) for the ever-expanding bubble of the universe.
And seeing how the proponents of hardcore materialism allege that time, space, and matter didn't even exist prior to the initial expansion of the infinitesimal singularity [.],...
...then what else other than "absolute nothingness" could those blackened areas be called?
Btw, don't get hung up on the details of those rudimentary images. Instead, use your imagination to peer-out into the farthest reaches of the actual universe, to what, logically, must be a light barrier, and try to picture what the ever-expanding light barrier (the metaphorical "film" of the bubble) is expanding into.
Indeed, if not into an infinite and "boundless" nothingness that could never be filled to capacity no matter how many universes come into existence,...
...then what else could it be?
_______
In other words, both are bounded by reason of the limited (finite) amount of the life essence that makes up the sum total of each individual mind itself.
And I agree with you that time did not begin to exist at the moment of the alleged Big Bang.
As mentioned earlier, I am simply pointing out what the hardcore materialists seem to believe.
Furthermore, in this post here - https://forum.philosophynow.org/viewto ... 78#p390978 - I too tried to make it clear that time had no "beginning."
However, if you think about it, there is a mystery as to what speed time would be moving if there were no minds and clocks to sense and measure its passing.
Your own mind is like a separate dimension of reality (a "parallel universe," if you will) that contains its own autonomous spatial arena in which the phenomenal features of your thoughts and dreams exist and play-out.
Clearly, your mind had a beginning.
Well, I suggest that the same applies to the universe, which is simply the mind of a higher Being who also seems to have had a beginning just like us.
Indeed, I pointed that out in the following excerpt from an alternate thread...
seeds wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 8:44 pm "...You need to realize that every time you close your eyes to think or dream, you are peering into what appears to be an infinite "spatial arena" (your mind) that is filled with billions of holographic-like manifestations of "reality"...
...all of which, if projected back in time, will converge and disappear into a "single dimensionless point" that represents the moment when your mind (and "I Am-ness") first came into existence.
And the point is that I suggest we are seeing something similar to that when we project the holographic-like features of the universe back in time..."
What?
Be careful how you word things, because I thought we both agreed that time had no "beginning."
Again, you are confusing "spacetime," also known as the "fabric of spacetime"...
(which can not only be thought of as a "fabric" from which the phenomenal features of the universe, along with the interstitial areas of empty space between those features are woven, but also as what binds the bubble of the universe together into one cohesive whole unto itself)
...again, you are confusing that with "absolute nothingness" (or "void," as mentioned by Sculptor).
They are not the same.
Can't you just be happy knowing that you are correct in asserting that the ultimate "whole" (or the "ALL-THAT-IS") is indeed "boundless"?
_______