Is Eternity Actually Possible?

Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5134
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Is Eternity Actually Possible?

 

There's a lot of shite preached here by the godly who love to throw around the word eternity like they know what it means. But what does eternity actually mean if we cannot comprehend it? Can we really understand with our finite minds and limited capabilities, the concept of eternity? As some one else said on another thread (Sinph?), theists define eternity by what it does not do (end), and not by what it is.

My best feel-guess is still the stuff of youth, you know the one around the campfire at cadets in year ten when you smoked that gum-leaf cigarette some one said was a joint and looked at the stars. But it actually feels like a lot more like a deeper embracing of now than an appreciation of endless time.

In fact my mind rebels at the concept of eternity giving me no more than momentary tastes of something that feels more like vertigo than true comprehension of the concept of a thing that by definition is beyond measure and thus beyond definition.

I'd be interested to hear if others have felt, comprehended or believe in eternity. Do we even think there is a need for eternity? The universe is not eternal - what is it 14-16 billion years old? Does a universe need a concept like eternity to exist within?

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


chndlrjhnsn
chndlrjhnsn's picture
Posts: 159
Joined: 2010-03-28
User is offlineOffline
If time has no beginning, we

If time has no beginning, we could never have arrived at this point in time. An infinite amount of time would have to go by first, which would never come to an end.  


Kapkao
atheistSuperfan
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Re:thread subject

"Eternity", as a vernacular definition, is a by-product of human subjective reasoning. The "possibility" is largely irrelevant because Einstein's General Relativity demonstrates that time itself does not behave in a predictable manner.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao wrote:"Eternity", as

Kapkao wrote:

"Eternity", as a vernacular definition, is a by-product of human subjective reasoning. The "possibility" is largely irrelevant because Einstein's General Relativity demonstrates that time itself does not behave in a predictable manner.

What he said.

We think we understand some things and in reality we are only painting a color on something we can't fully understand, and may not want to admit in some cases.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Blake
atheistScience Freak
Posts: 991
Joined: 2010-02-19
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao wrote:"Eternity", as

Kapkao wrote:

"Eternity", as a vernacular definition, is a by-product of human subjective reasoning. The "possibility" is largely irrelevant because Einstein's General Relativity demonstrates that time itself does not behave in a predictable manner.

 

Well, it could be said to behave in a deterministic manner (based on generally unpredictable/imprecise reference frames), but you can say it is very counter-intuitive.  It is predictable within the bounds of uncertainty- but counter-intuitive by all measures.

 

The staggering extent to which Christianity is profoundly wrong only begins with the primitive and flawed concept of time that it purveys.

 

 

 

chndlrjhnsn wrote:

If time has no beginning, we could never have arrived at this point in time. An infinite amount of time would have to go by first, which would never come to an end.  

 

This is arguably true provided a bunk concept of time. 

View time as another dimension of space, however, and it's easy to select any point along the line arbitrarily as a "now".  That is, in this context, time doesn't pass, so it just depends on your perspective; our experience of "now-ness" just being one particular coordinate in this space time.

For Christians, though, any concept of time which is more realistic is unacceptable- that would mean every instant of your life remains objectively real and eternal (and fundamental to the nature of reality), and that you don't need heaven to avoid disappearing from the universe; you as an entity just exist within the bounds of these spatial and temporal coordinates from an objective timeless perspective (which is what everybody seems to be concerned with, even though such a perspective doesn't really exist since no observer could exist outside the context of time).

An appropriate metaphor would be to think of every moment of your life as a page in a gigantic book wherein there is no reader, and the pages themselves are self-aware of their contents, and passively aware of the pages that came before them.  The existence of a last page in the book has no effect on the other pages objective existence in perpetuity.

 

Then throw any legitimate interpretation of the implications of quantum mechanics into the mix, and you make the proposition even more problematic for Christians, as life itself extends potentially indefinitely at successively lower probability for the extent of remaining time in the universe (be that it may itself be infinite).

That is, you are literally and almost certainly immortal... just that "most of you" dies. 

 

In a potentially infinite (but smaller subset/region of infinity- like saying there are an infinite number of points between 0 and 1, which is true) series of discrete universes you will, by extraordinary good luck (or bad) live forever (or at least until the end of time) in any possible configuration across an increasingly small (but still existent) range of universes.

This is arguably just as bad as good, though.  For every playboy manor you spend an ageless eternity in, there may be about the same range of improbable universes in which you spend it in an auschwitz.

Due the functional chaos, we are unable to properly estimate the statistical chances of any given configuration of the universe- we can only say that which is possible (which may not be all that is conceivable, or may exceed the conceivable- we don't know) would inevitably occur with the precise frequency of its probability.

 

The extreme edges of probability, where things are inconsequentially rare, are likely somewhat chaotically incoherent.

See the effects of Doglas Adams' Infinite improbability drive

 

The more we come to understand what would be objective reality, the less intuitive it often is- and the less derivative of bronze age mythology.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
If there really is an

If there really is an 'eternity', ie, it probably corresponds to Aleph-1, the cardinality of the natural numbers, rather than Aleph-0, the cardinality of the 'natural' numbers, or integers.

If that is the case, then we can say that anything with a probability of happening which can be expressed as 1/100000...., for a finite number rof zeroes, will happen, somewhere along the time line.

So, ironically for the Theist, an insistence on the reality of 'Eternity' demolishes any argument for God based on anything short of the absolute impossibility of our Universe and Life emerging by 'chance'.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Blake
atheistScience Freak
Posts: 991
Joined: 2010-02-19
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:So,

BobSpence1 wrote:

So, ironically for the Theist, an insistence on the reality of 'Eternity' demolishes any argument for God based on anything short of the absolute impossibility of our Universe and Life emerging by 'chance'.

 

Which means that they either have to prove that wave functions are limited in ways that they have been demonstrated not to be (undoing decades of empirical evidence of quantum mechanics), or they have to prove that life is not formed from an assortment of material.

 

However, like with any theistic assertion, they don't think they need proof, because they have faith:

 

Theists will assert that living things (at least humans) have souls, and that anything that emerged without those souls would be a mindless machine- further demanding of us proof that physics can fully explain chemistry which can fully explain biology which can fully explain all human action (and without every detail, they would persist in insisting that this is proof of a 'soul of the gaps'). 

And even if we do that... they'll still say we have souls, and that those beings don't have "free will" and so aren't alive.

Even if we prove behavior is identical, they'll ad hoc it again, and say there's free will in one but not the other by their god's grace or something such as this.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao wrote:"Eternity", as

Kapkao wrote:
"Eternity", as a vernacular definition, is a by-product of human subjective reasoning. The "possibility" is largely irrelevant because Einstein's General Relativity demonstrates that time itself does not behave in a predictable manner.

 

The appeal to relativity really does not lock out the concept of an unbounded T axis. In order to use relativity in the way that you seem to be doing, you need to define two points on some give T axis and compare them to similar points on a T' axis.

 

Also, it is not really true that time becomes unpredictable at relativistic velocities. In point of fact, the mathematics have been understood for a century or so. What would be more accurate would be to say that ordinary intuitive notions of time break down under the conditions of relativity and even then, only when comparing different reference frames. However, I doubt that ordinary intuition will serve well for a discussion of eternity.

 

Atheistextremist wrote:
I'd be interested to hear if others have felt, comprehended or believe in eternity. Do we even think there is a need for eternity? The universe is not eternal - what is it 14-16 billion years old? Does a universe need a concept like eternity to exist within?

 

Well the currently accepted value for the age of the universe is 13.75 Billion years with error bars below 200 million years. New discoveries could change that number of course. However, that only sets a bound in one direction. There is at present time, no data of which I am aware that limits the development of the universe in the other direction.

 

This is an interesting area to speculate on. BobSpence took a stab at it with his introduction of aleph1 to suggest an infinite unbounded existence. However, I am not quite clear on why he is going there. Aleph numbers are an expression of mathematics and not necessarily a concept that applies to a real existence.

 

Another way to look at the question is cosmologically. There are a few different models of the universe that have enjoyed academic currency in the past two or three decades. Each of them paints quite a different future for the universe but the ones that seem to imply a future bound on the T axis have pretty much fallen under modern astronomical observations. What evidence we now have suggests that the universe will expand forever.

 

That being said, the old idea of a heat death scenario also pretty much seems to be off the table as well. The most current ideas seem to hold that while the universe will expand forever, the 41 closest galaxies to our own are gravitationally bound so that they will eventually merge to make a single supergalaxy (possible time frame of 10~20 billion years). Eventually, all of the elements which may be used as stellar fuel will have been used up (somewhere past 100 billion years) and everything then will end up in a sort of cosmic death spiral, eventually merging with the central black hole.

 

That certainly does not sound much like eternity. However, the most current calculations also provide that as the universe winds down, the microwave background will eventually drop below the temperature of even the largest possible black hole (black hole temperatures are inversely related to mass). When that happens, the black hole will begin to become a net emitter of mass and eventually, it will disappear altogether.

 

Whether that mass will emerge in a form that is useful as stellar fuel is not currently known but given that the supergalaxy scenario speaks to a universe that is bounded and of finite mass, if the end stage black hole can eventually produce useful stellar fuel, then you might just have a universe that is bounded in space but not in time.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
I'm going with my box in a

I'm going with my box in a box theory on this subject. Eternity as we define it may not exactly be eternal for our universe but there will always be something even if it is outside of our universe. This is my personal thought on what eternity may be. IMO we are as ants, we have our own little world and despite what knowledge we can obtain, we will never fully understand the workings of everything, not by a longshot. We are just too small and insignifigant in the greater picture.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Kapkao
atheistSuperfan
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
pfftt

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

Kapkao wrote:
"Eternity", as a vernacular definition, is a by-product of human subjective reasoning. The "possibility" is largely irrelevant because Einstein's General Relativity demonstrates that time itself does not behave in a predictable manner.

 

The appeal to relativity really does not lock out the concept of an unbounded T axis. In order to use relativity in the way that you seem to be doing, you need to define two points on some give T axis and compare them to similar points on a T' axis.

 

Also, it is not really true that time becomes unpredictable at relativistic velocities. In point of fact, the mathematics have been understood for a century or so. What would be more accurate would be to say that ordinary intuitive notions of time break down under the conditions of relativity and even then, only when comparing different reference frames. However, I doubt that ordinary intuition will serve well for a discussion of eternity.

Ordinary, man-made mathematics are rarely perfect on the first attempt. Why bother thinking about timespace in linear fashion when there are at least 7 other dimensions that can't be readily detected OR observed?

Our species' understanding of "quantum foam" has barely been tested OR proven. Strings were initially disregarded because some idiot egghead thought the concept was "untestable".

And here's my favorite part: "time" appears to be the construct of a human mind attempting to understand the inertia found in much of the natural phenomena that IS readily observable by our species. 

Answers... not even Planck's Quantum Mechanics can be made to agree with General Relativity on most questions of physics. These two models do not "overlap" with each other, as far as most advanced questions of given initial circumstances and ultimate outcomes are concerned with regards to natural phenomena.

So I will ask you in all sincerity; was there a valid point somewhere in that convoluted post of yours, or do you simply enjoy making a fool out of yourself on the basis of currently existing conventions of knowledge and the highly flawed precept that 'all physical phenomena can be predicted on the basis of linear arithmetic crafted by less-than efficient minds'?

The appeal to ANY model of physics mysteriously does not lock out a nonlinear pattern to timespace... or, for that matter, any other currently detected physical phenomena in the universe.

 

But we still draw lines on chalk boards and computers because... that's the only thing that makes sense to us and our weak, rigid, and often laughably inefficient patterns of thought. Color me surprised.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:If that is the case,

 

Quote:
If that is the case, then we can say that anything with a probability of happening which can be expressed as 1/100000...., for a finite number rof zeroes, will happen, somewhere along the time line.

Ow.  My brain just hurt the inside of my head.

So... if theists are right, and eternity exists, then... um... divide by zero, and everything gets sucked into the probability drive?

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Quote:If

Hambydammit wrote:

 

Quote:
If that is the case, then we can say that anything with a probability of happening which can be expressed as 1/100000...., for a finite number rof zeroes, will happen, somewhere along the time line.

Ow.  My brain just hurt the inside of my head.

So... if theists are right, and eternity exists, then... um... divide by zero, and everything gets sucked into the probability drive?

Maybe, in the spirit of Douglas Adams, that should be the 'Infinite Improbability Drive'....

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:Maybe, in the spirit

 

Quote:
Maybe, in the spirit of Douglas Adams, that should be the 'Infinite Improbability Drive'....

Heh... no doubt.  But seriously, thinking about this makes my brain hurt.  I used to use an argument about evolution against ID'ers -- "Regardless of how improbable abiogenesis is, if there is infinite time and even a remote possibility, then it will definitely happen.  Since we're alive, it stands to reason that we're where it happened."  I stopped using it precisely because it presumed part of their worldview which doesn't seem to hold up to modern science, but it's still an interesting paradox that arises from their own dogma.

But then... dividing one by an infinite number?  Ouch.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

 

Quote:
Maybe, in the spirit of Douglas Adams, that should be the 'Infinite Improbability Drive'....

Heh... no doubt.  But seriously, thinking about this makes my brain hurt.  I used to use an argument about evolution against ID'ers -- "Regardless of how improbable abiogenesis is, if there is infinite time and even a remote possibility, then it will definitely happen.  Since we're alive, it stands to reason that we're where it happened."  I stopped using it precisely because it presumed part of their worldview which doesn't seem to hold up to modern science, but it's still an interesting paradox that arises from their own dogma.

But then... dividing one by an infinite number?  Ouch. 

Actually, I was trying to imply a finite but arbitrarily large number of zeroes in the 1/1000000...., so any non-zero probability thing will happen sometime in a 'real' eternity.

I know that will still make your brain hurt....

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Adventfred
atheist
Adventfred's picture
Posts: 298
Joined: 2009-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Bobspencer according to

Bobspencer according to laurence krauss our universe appears to be infinite

now my question is

is infinity and eternity the same

also if the universe is infinite then time would just keep going and going forever ? 


Ken G.
Posts: 1352
Joined: 2008-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:Is Eternity Actually Possible

   If I remember correctly,there's no such thing as Eternity,as Albert Einstein wrote in his " Special Theory of Relativity " that there is no time ,it's a human concept.A tool that is realy useful and hard to shake off the Illusions.

Signature ? How ?


Kapkao
atheistSuperfan
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Ken G. wrote:   If I

Ken G. wrote:

   If I remember correctly,there's no such thing as Eternity,as Albert Einstein wrote in his " Special Theory of Relativity " that there is no time ,it's a human concept.A tool that is realy useful and hard to shake off the Illusions.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Whatthedeuce
atheist
Whatthedeuce's picture
Posts: 200
Joined: 2008-07-19
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote: If that

BobSpence1 wrote:

 

If that is the case, then we can say that anything with a probability of happening which can be expressed as 1/100000...., for a finite number rof zeroes, will happen, somewhere along the time line.

So, ironically for the Theist, an insistence on the reality of 'Eternity' demolishes any argument for God based on anything short of the absolute impossibility of our Universe and Life emerging by 'chance'.

 

I don't think this applies. I think most theists will say that time has a beginning, but no end. They can then assert that the probability that some very unlikely event has happened in the amount of time the universe has already existed is incredibly small. Yes, it will happen eventually, but it  need not have happened yet.

I don't understand why the Christians I meet find it so confusing that I care about the fact that they are wasting huge amounts of time and resources playing with their imaginary friend. Even non-confrontational religion hurts atheists because we live in a society which is constantly wasting resources and rejecting rational thinking.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Adventfred wrote:Bobspencer

Adventfred wrote:

Bobspencer according to laurence krauss our universe appears to be infinite

now my question is

is infinity and eternity the same

also if the universe is infinite then time would just keep going and going forever ? 

'Infinite' would normally refer to the extent in space, the size of the Universe.

Eternal refers to something that always has, and always will 'exist'.

Eternity in this case refers to infinite or unending time.

I have a problem with our universe being infinite, since it is not infinitely old. For it to be infinite now, then unless somehow the Big Bang singularity was actually infinite in size, which doesn'd quite make sense to me, it would have had to expand at an infinite rate for some finite time...

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Whatthedeuce

Whatthedeuce wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

 

If that is the case, then we can say that anything with a probability of happening which can be expressed as 1/100000...., for a finite number rof zeroes, will happen, somewhere along the time line.

So, ironically for the Theist, an insistence on the reality of 'Eternity' demolishes any argument for God based on anything short of the absolute impossibility of our Universe and Life emerging by 'chance'.

 

I don't think this applies. I think most theists will say that time has a beginning, but no end. They can then assert that the probability that some very unlikely event has happened in the amount of time the universe has already existed is incredibly small. Yes, it will happen eventually, but it  need not have happened yet.

I have thought of that myself, that infinite time doesn't have to extend infinitely both ways.

But that doesn't fit with the Theist idea of an eternal entity, which they normally define as having no beginning or end.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Adventfred
atheist
Adventfred's picture
Posts: 298
Joined: 2009-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Ken G. wrote:   If I


Ken G. wrote:

   If I remember correctly,there's no such thing as Eternity,as Albert Einstein wrote in his " Special Theory of Relativity " that there is no time ,it's a human concept.A tool that is realy useful and hard to shake off the Illusions.

 

can i have a link and also if there is no time that means that everything that will happen is happening now 


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:I have a

BobSpence1 wrote:
I have a problem with our universe being infinite, since it is not infinitely old. For it to be infinite now, then unless somehow the Big Bang singularity was actually infinite in size, which doesn'd quite make sense to me, it would have had to expand at an infinite rate for some finite time...

 

Well sure, if the universe began a finite time in the past, then it seems reasonable that it be finite in respect to extent in time. By extension, I would also be willing to accept that it is finite with respect to current volume. However, I would still be willing to go with time being open ended in a single direction as eternity.

 

This does, of course, depend on the specific theistic conception which one is using. Let me get back to one of your earlier propositions:

 

BobSpence1 wrote:
Eternal refers to something that always has, and always will 'exist'.

 

Here I am not quite willing to run with that. Remember that different flavors of theist have different ideas about the concept. As a former high church Anglican, I was raised with a doxology that seems on the face to presuppose a special creation that is only open ended in one direction with regards to time.

 

Quote:
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost:

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Rich Woods
Rational VIP!
Rich Woods's picture
Posts: 868
Joined: 2008-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Eternity *Definately*

Eternity *Definately* Exists....

 

I spent it married to my first wife...


Adventfred
atheist
Adventfred's picture
Posts: 298
Joined: 2009-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Rich Woods wrote:Eternity

Rich Woods wrote:

Eternity *Definately* Exists....

 

I spent it married to my first wife...

 

ha ha the beginning of the end lmao

 

Ontopic: So if the universe has a beginning does that mean it cant be infinite and never end ?

we seem to living in a flat universe anyways 


Whatthedeuce
atheist
Whatthedeuce's picture
Posts: 200
Joined: 2008-07-19
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:I have

BobSpence1 wrote:

I have thought of that myself, that infinite time doesn't have to extend infinitely both ways.

But that doesn't fit with the Theist idea of an eternal entity, which they normally define as having no beginning or end.

 

Hmmm. maybe I am misunderstanding theists. It was my impression that they only assert that god, and a few other concepts which might be more specific to a certain religion such as heaven, hell, or a soul exist eternally. However, I don't think I've ever heard one say that the physical universe does.

edit: at least, when I was a theist, I never claimed that the physical universe had no beginning.

 

 

I don't understand why the Christians I meet find it so confusing that I care about the fact that they are wasting huge amounts of time and resources playing with their imaginary friend. Even non-confrontational religion hurts atheists because we live in a society which is constantly wasting resources and rejecting rational thinking.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Whatthedeuce

Whatthedeuce wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

I have thought of that myself, that infinite time doesn't have to extend infinitely both ways.

But that doesn't fit with the Theist idea of an eternal entity, which they normally define as having no beginning or end.

 

Hmmm. maybe I am misunderstanding theists. It was my impression that they only assert that god, and a few other concepts which might be more specific to a certain religion such as heaven, hell, or a soul exist eternally. However, I don't think I've ever heard one say that the physical universe does.

edit: at least, when I was a theist, I never claimed that the physical universe had no beginning.

 

Not saying that theists think our Universe is 'eternal', in either the one-way or bi-directional sense, just that when they say God is eternal, they certainly don't mean in just one direction.

But that implies that there is some 'higher' reality, 'outside' our universe, our 'reality', which is without beginning or end, within which God dwells. Or that God is that higher reality.

But it is conceivable to me that our universe, as originated in the Big Bang a finite time ago, may indeed persist, in some fading form, indefinitely into the future. So it could be infinite in some sense.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Ken G.
Posts: 1352
Joined: 2008-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Adventfred wrote:can i have a link

                   This is a good article from DISCOVER  discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/in-no-time

Signature ? How ?


Fortunate_S
TheistTroll
Posts: 105
Joined: 2010-04-24
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

There's a lot of shite preached here by the godly who love to throw around the word eternity like they know what it means. But what does eternity actually mean if we cannot comprehend it? Can we really understand with our finite minds and limited capabilities, the concept of eternity? As some one else said on another thread (Sinph?), theists define eternity by what it does not do (end), and not by what it is.

My best feel-guess is still the stuff of youth, you know the one around the campfire at cadets in year ten when you smoked that gum-leaf cigarette some one said was a joint and looked at the stars. But it actually feels like a lot more like a deeper embracing of now than an appreciation of endless time.

In fact my mind rebels at the concept of eternity giving me no more than momentary tastes of something that feels more like vertigo than true comprehension of the concept of a thing that by definition is beyond measure and thus beyond definition.

I'd be interested to hear if others have felt, comprehended or believe in eternity. Do we even think there is a need for eternity? The universe is not eternal - what is it 14-16 billion years old? Does a universe need a concept like eternity to exist within?


To us, "eternity" means "existing at all times". 

To God, it means "without beginning and without end".

 


chndlrjhnsn
chndlrjhnsn's picture
Posts: 159
Joined: 2010-03-28
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_S wrote:To us,

Fortunate_S wrote:


To us, "eternity" means "existing at all times". 

To God, it means "without beginning and without end".

What is the difference?


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
chndlrjhnsn

chndlrjhnsn wrote:

Fortunate_S wrote:


To us, "eternity" means "existing at all times". 

To God, it means "without beginning and without end".

What is the difference?

Obviously, God is that which doesn't actually exist - that certainly fits the criteria of being without beginning or end.

It can also apply to any fundamental property of reality, like the ultimate laws of physics.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


chndlrjhnsn
chndlrjhnsn's picture
Posts: 159
Joined: 2010-03-28
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:chndlrjhnsn

BobSpence1 wrote:

chndlrjhnsn wrote:

Fortunate_S wrote:


To us, "eternity" means "existing at all times". 

To God, it means "without beginning and without end".

What is the difference?

Obviously, God is that which doesn't actually exist - that certainly fits the criteria of being without beginning or end.

It can also apply to any fundamental property of reality, like the ultimate laws of physics.

That was fucking hilarious, Bob.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3995
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote: I'd

Atheistextremist wrote:

 I'd be interested to hear if others have felt, comprehended or believe in eternity. Do we even think there is a need for eternity? The universe is not eternal - what is it 14-16 billion years old? Does a universe need a concept like eternity to exist within?

For narcissists(aka theists), the thought of their own existence comming to an eternal end is incomprehensible. So we have religion to stroke their egos.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:Obviously,

BobSpence1 wrote:

Obviously, God is that which doesn't actually exist - that certainly fits the criteria of being without beginning or end.

It can also apply to any fundamental property of reality, like the ultimate laws of physics.

 

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Mahaco
Posts: 58
Joined: 2010-04-30
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

Obviously, God is that which doesn't actually exist - that certainly fits the criteria of being without beginning or end.

It can also apply to any fundamental property of reality, like the ultimate laws of physics.

 

 

Wow, that's hilarious!


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Well, you can thank google

Well, you can thank google images for that one. I had to look at like 3 dozen demotivators before I found that one. While I was there, I also snagged another irony demotivator where the pic was hot babes dresses in outfits that leave nearly nothing to the imagination protesting against prostitution.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Kapkao
atheistSuperfan
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
(No subject)


Adventfred
atheist
Adventfred's picture
Posts: 298
Joined: 2009-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Ken G.

Ken G. wrote:

                   This is a good article from DISCOVER  discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/in-no-time

 

ok can we has booze now Sticking out tongue intentional grammatical error 


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3995
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

Well, you can thank google images for that one. I had to look at like 3 dozen demotivators before I found that one. While I was there, I also snagged another irony demotivator where the pic was hot babes dresses in outfits that leave nearly nothing to the imagination protesting against prostitution.

 

You must be talking about the protests in Ukraine:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIfmz-FXZxc

I know most guys that saw that now think, hot damn they got hookers that look like that there, I'm going.

 

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Ken G.

Ken G. wrote:

                   This is a good article from DISCOVER  discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/in-no-time

I always looked at time as the measurement of motion, not a real force or anything, just measuring motion, everything is in motion.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Yes, that video is at least

Yes, that video is at least a similar protest.  However, having seen the video, I have to say that if you are going to appear with dollar bills in your mouth and panties, then you are probably not making the point that you intended to.

 

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3995
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

Yes, that video is at least a similar protest.  However, having seen the video, I have to say that if you are going to appear with dollar bills in your mouth and panties, then you are probably not making the point that you intended to.

 

Maybe these chicks give it away for free then. I'm all for that.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen