bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 11:41 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 27, 2024 11:45 pm
bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 27, 2024 3:26 pm
No. Infinite regress is logically impossible. You can read it
here.
How do the words, 'spacetime has always existed', equate to 'infinite regress', to you "bahman"?
If time has always existed,
But you do not yet know what 'time' is, exactly, "bahman". So, why do you wonder how long 'time' has existed for?
bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 11:25 am
then it means that there is always a time before any time that you assume.
But I do not assume 'any time'. Do you assume 'any time'?
If yes, then what could 'assuming any time' even mean, or could be referring to, exactly?
bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 11:25 am
That is the very definition of infinite regress.
So, to "bahman" 'now', the 'very definition of 'infinite regress' is:
'There is always a time before 'any time' that you, readers, assume'.
Now, if absolutely any of you, readers, would like to go back over "bahman's" assertions and claims throughout this forum, then there you will find and see irrefutable proof of just how much a person with beliefs will try just absolute any way of re-wording things just in the hope that something/anything will back up, support, and/or justify their position and belief.
As will be clearly seen, even without one skerrick of proof, some will still believe and maintain that they know what the actual Truth is, exactly.
And, what can be clearly seen with 'this one' here is, it is not even trying to argue for one particular thing here, and this is because it has absolutely no idea about what could even be possibly true here, let what is actually True here.
bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 11:25 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 27, 2024 11:45 pm
To even just imagine that it does is at the highest level of absurdity, let alone actually presuming or believing that those words equate to 'infinite regress'.
If 'regress' to you means,
'the action of returning to a former state', (which let us not forget that your definition here is not necessarily what is agreed with and accepted by absolutely anyone else here let alone all here), But anyway, if you want to use 'this definition', and also say and claim:
'Infinite regress means that there are infinite former states. To discuss let's move one by one to the former state. There is however a state former than any state that you assume. This means that you cannot reach to infinite former state. This means that by the reverse process, one cannot reach from an arbitrary state in the infinite former state to the current state as well. The current state exists. Therefore, infinite regress is logically impossible.'
Then, what you call 'infinite regress' has absolutely nothing at all to do with the Universe, Itself. And this is just because the Universe, Itself, is never in any other state. The Universe is always only in the one 'constant state'. That 'constant state' is just A state of constant-change. What this now mans that the 'current state' that the Universe is in NOW has been and will be forever-always.
Now, are you able to comprehend and understand 'this'?
THe universe always changing but that is not the point. The question is whether the universe has always existed.
So, you agree and accept that the Universe is always changing, right?
If yes, then the answer to the question, 'Whether the Universe has always existed?' (which by the way is not the best written question going), but, anyway, if what you are actually asking is; 'Has the Universe always existed?', then the irrefutable answer is, 'Yes'.
And, before you resort back to some thing about 'infinite regress', (from whichever definition you want to choose, and/or use at any time), the Universe is always in one state, alone. And, IS, eternally-forever.