Quote:

I wasn't talking about numbers, but negative sizes. A negative size doesn't exist, which is exactly what we were after more or less; 'nothing'.



Ok, I guess I see your analogy....though I'll have to revisit why this is still a problem, later in the post.

Quote:

Contradicting, how? We can't measure negative sizes, but it's not contradicting, or is it?



Yes, a negative size is not logically possible. Size is the measure of an object's spacial dimensions. The measure of spatial dimensions will always leave you with a positive number. You can't have a square-circle, and you can't have a line that's -3 inches long. It hurts my brain even trying to imagine such a thing.

I don't know if that's really the law of non-contradiction, I guess, but its illogical and impossible.

Quote:

If something goes on forever it's infinite, thus theoretically it can have a start.



Its a potential infinite. Which is what the universe is.

Quote:

Tricky part is, how do you know it will go on forever?



You don't, I guess. That's why they call it a 'potential' infinite.

Quote:

There's no real way of knowing if it is infinite, but assuming it is infinite (let's assume you've seen there's no end for logic's sake), then why wouldn't this be absolute infinity?



Because an absolute infinite has no beginning or end, which is what seperates it from a potential infinite. That's just its definition. And it doesn't help anyway. If you're trying to prove the universe has been around forever, you can't postulate that it has had a beginning, which is what my point was.

Quote:

Eternity is a long time though.



Exactly.

Quote:

Which wasn't the case, so either time has always been there 'so it could happen' or the absence of time is irrelevant for a universe to come into existence.



The existence of the universe, and the absence of non-existence is an interesting subject. However, this was my point with there being some extra-universal force. Something that would make time irrelevant, because if nothing existed above and beyond the universe, then the universe (having a beginning, and needing a start based on my previous points) would never have started. So you're kind of following my trail here, we're just probably going to part ways when it comes to there being some kind of extra-universal "cause" or "force", which may or may not be personal (eg God) depending on further inference.

Quote:

Naturally at some point time must simply exist yes, but if there are no positive sizes, no distances and no motion then even if time does exist in this nothingness, it'll be "neutral" and non-indicative. I think time is quite artificial actually, but that's a different topic altogether,



Ok, time is somewhat illusory. But if this is truly a "nothingness", then time wouldn't exist. Otherwise that would defeat the purpose of the nothingness.

Last edited by Irish_Farmer; 05/17/07 23:28.
"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."