Are timeless entities impossible?: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Metaphysics and Epistemology » Are timeless entities impossible? » Are timeless entities impossible?

Are timeless entities impossible?

Page: 1 2 3

Are timeless entities impossible?

180 Proof
kynic

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 27, 2003
Location: NOTHINGlifeNOTHING

Total Topics: 84
Total Posts: 5139

Posted 10/30/09 - 01:42 PM:	#21
rigelrover wrote: I am not sure where the abstraction considerations are leading, but there is strong evidence that a timeless entity 'exists'; namely in the event of our universe coming into being. There is no "evidence" of an "event of our universe coming into being". Such a claim makes no sense conceptually (re: an event prior to spacetime (i.e. eventuality)) or scientifically in light of the Hartle-Hawking wavefunction (i.e. initial conditions that do not consist in a temporal boundary, or "beginning" (e.g. singularity)). Maybe I'm missing something ... Edited by 180 Proof on 10/30/09 - 07:00 PM. Reason: Does a moebius loop have a beginning or a sphere an edge?
The question isn't "Which explanations do I believe?" but rather "Which explanations do I least disbelieve?" Absence of evidence THAT MUST BE THERE (i.e. implied by any claim, concept, or (its) predicates, that affects changes in/to the world) entails evidence of absence. [What cannot be done?[What cannot be hoped?[What cannot be known?]]]

Odin
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 09, 2009

Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 214

Posted 10/30/09 - 01:52 PM:	#22
Yes, something immaterial. Time and matter all "began" a long time ago likely with the big bang, whatever "existed" before them existed in the state you describe. Some people say it was God existing "before" that, other people say different things, but the fact is that the universe came into existence and logically we ascribe a cause to every effect.

NothingtoSay
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 11, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 287

Posted 10/30/09 - 02:29 PM:	#23
You mean something changeless?

180 Proof
kynic

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 27, 2003
Location: NOTHINGlifeNOTHING

Total Topics: 84
Total Posts: 5139

Posted 10/30/09 - 06:50 PM:	#24
Odin wrote: ... but the fact is that the universe came into existence ... Would you mind explaining, or pointing me in the direction of, this so-called "fact"? Btw, isn't time "timeless"? Edited by 180 Proof on 10/30/09 - 07:44 PM. Reason: Counting negative numbers on my fingers ...
The question isn't "Which explanations do I believe?" but rather "Which explanations do I least disbelieve?" Absence of evidence THAT MUST BE THERE (i.e. implied by any claim, concept, or (its) predicates, that affects changes in/to the world) entails evidence of absence. [What cannot be done?[What cannot be hoped?[What cannot be known?]]]

rigelrover
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 05, 2009

Total Topics: 19
Total Posts: 562

Posted 11/12/09 - 11:01 AM:	#25
180 Proof wrote: There is no "evidence" of an "event of our universe coming into being". Such a claim makes no sense conceptually (re: an event prior to spacetime (i.e. eventuality)) or scientifically in light of the Hartle-Hawking wavefunction (i.e. initial conditions that do not consist in a temporal boundary, or "beginning" (e.g. singularity)). Maybe I'm missing something ... Mine was poorly worded, but can you say more about yours? I have read a few of Hawking's books, and now this paper, but have not heard mention of an explanation for a potential universe becoming an actual universe, etc. in it, only a description of nature of the geometry of the universe (that has been tested by the quantum hypotheses and relativistic relations that are commonly accepted as brute facts about our universe). I have heard an explanation external to this description for how potential becomes actual, but I have not heard one for how potential becomes potential in the first place. Do you have any more information on that? (I am purely interested) My suggestion was only that a timeless entity (i.e. a nondescript informational carrier that exceeds the boundary conditions of a time-like metric) may be the 'early' universe itself; or perhaps the universe on the whole. I did go further and speculate a bit about a priori agency vis a vis transcendence (but this sort of stuff is for the other 99.99999% of threads where it comes up, not here; right?) Edited by rigelrover on 11/12/09 - 11:21 AM
I am more interested in questions than answers; dialog than dictation. If we can reasonably believe that there is not just a breach, but a fundamentally unclosable gap between the individual mind and the ultimate nature of the reality; the primordial thing in itself, then 'true' mystery does exist.

Page: 1 2 3

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.