Eternity is a Paradox

So, I was talking with a good friend of mine yesterday and we started to get into a conversation about God, eternity, and afterlife. As most of you know, I do not believe in any of those three things, but my friend does. Kind of. Her beliefs are kind of hard to define and hardly relevant to the point, so there is no need to discuss them here. Anyways, we were talking about this, and all of a sudden she snapped up and said, "Oh my God, eternity is impossible!" She then explained to me why, and it took a while, but I eventually figured it out. I will now attempt to convey to you what she said to me:

Basically, eternity is never-ending. Not only that, but it also has no beginning. Of course, this already makes it somewhat infeasible to the human mind, but not necessarily an impossibility. However, let us think about what eternity means on a time line. Let's say that time is represented by a line, and the moment that we are now in is represented by a point on that line. However, a point is only useful if there is something else to refernce it to. For example, another point. So, let's say we place that point 200 years away from the original point. 200 years is significant because it has both a beginning and an end, which are represented by the two points on the line. But, compared to eternity, 200 is literally zero. 200 years quite literally is zero when compared to forever. Thus, that 200 year time period could be represented by the same point on an eternal time line, which would have to mean that everything within that 200 years happened all at once in that point.

Well, since eternity goes on forever in both direction, you could take any amount of time that you wanted and say that relative to eternity, it equals zero. You could go so far out as a billion years, and that still is zero compared to eternity. Thus, if eternity exists (we were actually talking about eternity in heaven at this point, but it is applicable to any kind of eternity you could imagine), everything that ever happened within eternity would happen at once, but because eternity goes on forever, that's not possible. But neither is it possible for eternity to just keep going, because even a billion billion years happens in one instant. So basically what you end up with is everything that ever happened is happening and will happen is condensed into a single point that ends at the same time it begins, thus making eternity itself zero, but according to the very definition of eternity going on forever, it isn't possible to cram everything into one point. Thus, eternity is a paradox, making it a complete impossibility.

Now, I hope I have explained my position adequately enough that even if you do not agree with it, you at least understand it. So... discuss.

What is the inverse of eternity?  Is it an instant or is it 0?

If you were to say that

200 = 0

just as much as

20,000 = 0,

then you would be wrong, as 0 =/= either one of these.  However, by saying that:

200/Infinity = 0

and that

20,000/Infinity = 0

you are in fact giving a value to infinity.

But let's rearrange the equation:

Infinity(0) = ?

It's not 200, nor is it 20,000.  In fact, it is 0.  So, at any time, Infinity is worthless, if you equate it to our experience.  If you try to put a value on it, you will fail, as there is no value to go with it.

Therefore, life is not divided into 'sections' of infinity.  Life just is.  Time is an experience, just as we experience 'love' or 'hate.'  Time is not a value, nor is it a part of 'eternity.'  Time is not a mathematical dimension as much as it is a description of mathematical dimensions.

Now, I hope I have explained my position adequately enough that even if you do not agree with it, you at least understand it. So... discuss.

I understand it, but it doesn't make sense. We measure time relative to us, not relative to infinity. :roll:

All you have to do is zoom in on the time line. Then you can measure smaller periods of time. :lol:

What is the inverse of eternity?  Is it an instant or is it 0?

If you were to say that

200 = 0

just as much as

20,000 = 0,

then you would be wrong, as 0 =/= either one of these.  However, by saying that:

200/Infinity = 0

and that

20,000/Infinity = 0

you are in fact giving a value to infinity.

But let's rearrange the equation:

Infinity(0) = ?

Infinity is anything divided by zero.

Quote from: "Astantia"

What is the inverse of eternity?  Is it an instant or is it 0?

If you were to say that

200 = 0

just as much as

20,000 = 0,

then you would be wrong, as 0 =/= either one of these.  However, by saying that:

200/Infinity = 0

and that

20,000/Infinity = 0

you are in fact giving a value to infinity.

But let's rearrange the equation:

Infinity(0) = ?

Infinity is anything divided by zero.

No it isn't.

Say I have 30 oranges and I divide them into 0 groups.
See, it isn't infinity, it just isn't anything.  We call it undefined because there is no way to define 30 oranges in no groups.

Time doesn't even exist, it's not a place or a thing, it's just made up bullshit so people can keep track of stuff.

Completely man made, and a bigger hoax upon the world than the RE theory.

The way I see it, the entire universe is a paradox. Just by having the capability to imagine a paradox; you, yourself, are a paradox.

The amount of gibberish in this thread masquerading as mathematics is simply appalling.

The amount of gibberish in this thread masquerading as mathematics is simply appalling.

Agreed.

Yeah, so, the main point of confusion is that you use the word "compare" in a sort of wibbly-wobbly way: "200 compared to eternity is literally zero".  What does this really mean?  I claim: nothing.

A single point has some interesting properties that intervals lack, and for this reason, 200 years, even "when compared to eternity", cannot really be thought of as a single point.  One such property is that it's possible to pick two distinct points in time within that hundred year interval; this is not possible with a single point in time.

It may seem to you that finite intervals, "compared to" infinite ones, have zero length, but it is simply not the case in any formally relevant way.  Maybe it's the case in an emotionally relevant way, but one cannot expect to draw sound conclusions about the universe by reasoning emotionally.  Like most people, you and your friend could use some training in formal reasoning.

Quote from: "skeptical scientist"

The amount of gibberish in this thread masquerading as mathematics is simply appalling.

Agreed.

Agreed x2.

~D-Draw

Time doesn't even exist, it's not a place or a thing, it's just made up bullshit so people can keep track of stuff.

Completely man made, and a bigger hoax upon the world than the RE theory.

That's an interesting statement, I reckon you should start a new thread and expand your position. It could actually be an interesting discussion.

Time doesn't even exist, it's not a place or a thing, it's just made up bullshit so people can keep track of stuff.

Completely man made, and a bigger hoax upon the world than the RE theory.

YES YOU`RE RIGHT! EVERYBODY BURN THEIR CLOCKS!

actually time is by how long it takes for a photon of light to transverse a certain distance. for example one second is defined as how long it takes for a photon of light to go about 300000 km. therefore in every inertial frame there is an exact reference for time (since the speed of light does not change whatever velocity you are going).

to say that "time does not exist" is like saying Gravity doesn't exist (well.... the movement downtowards the earth whatever you please to call it)

to sound smart i will say :

 time is relative


refute that! lol

If time were a paradox as the original poster has said, then numbers themselves and all of mathematics would be a paradox. I’ll clarify:

Time, by their theory, is infinite. Numbers also have an infinite range.
They say any segment of the line is zero. That means every difference possible (2-1) would also be 0, thus destroying all of mathematics and making any mathematical proofs impossible.

Now, another point: 200/infinity≠0. It approaches zero, it’s almost zero, and a limit in Calculus will define it as 0, but it isn’t. You can never get to zero, and that is a fact.

If time were a paradox as the original poster has said, then numbers themselves and all of mathematics would be a paradox. I’ll clarify:

Time, by their theory, is infinite. Numbers also have an infinite range.
They say any segment of the line is zero. That means every difference possible (2-1) would also be 0, thus destroying all of mathematics and making any mathematical proofs impossible.

Now, another point: 200/infinity≠0. It approaches zero, it’s almost zero, and a limit in Calculus will define it as 0, but it isn’t. You can never get to zero, and that is a fact.

The quantity of garbage in this post masquerading as mathematics is truly absurd.

Quote from: "zaudragon"

If time were a paradox as the original poster has said, then numbers themselves and all of mathematics would be a paradox. I’ll clarify:

Time, by their theory, is infinite. Numbers also have an infinite range.
They say any segment of the line is zero. That means every difference possible (2-1) would also be 0, thus destroying all of mathematics and making any mathematical proofs impossible.

Now, another point: 200/infinity≠0. It approaches zero, it’s almost zero, and a limit in Calculus will define it as 0, but it isn’t. You can never get to zero, and that is a fact.

The quantity of garbage in this post masquerading as mathematics is truly absurd.

Which part? I think I’m not communicating well enough.

The last line. Firstly, writing "200/infinity≠0" implies that "200/infinity" has some meaning, which it doesn't. For division to make sense, the elements have to be invertible elements of some set with a well-defined multiplication, which infinity is not, under any sensible definition. Secondly, you say "it approaches zero" suggesting that some how the expression "200/infinity" while not taking on the value zero somehow approaches that value, which is again, mathematically speaking, complete gibberish. If you had a sequence x_n approaching infinity, then 200/x_n would approach zero, but "200/infinity" is a meaningless expression and doesn't approach anything. Finally, I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "you can never get to zero", but since zero is a real number as good as any other, I'm guessing you don't either.

The last line. Firstly, writing "200/infinity≠0" implies that "200/infinity" has some meaning, which it doesn't. For division to make sense, the elements have to be invertible elements of some set with a well-defined multiplication, which infinity is not, under any sensible definition. Secondly, you say "it approaches zero" suggesting that some how the expression "200/infinity" while not taking on the value zero somehow approaches that value, which is again, mathematically speaking, complete gibberish. If you had a sequence x_n approaching infinity, then 200/x_n would approach zero, but "200/infinity" is a meaningless expression and doesn't approach anything. Finally, I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "you can never get to zero", but since zero is a real number as good as any other, I'm guessing you don't either.

Ah ok.
I wrote that because writing a limit would be too much work to make it comprehensible:
lim
x->infinity (200/x)=0
And that still doesn’t look good. I’m sorry I neglected to do that.

who says eternity is a straight line anyway?

So your saying that in a universe where nothing is impossible, something actually IS impossible?

What is so hard to understand? Time exists because we percieve it. We experience it constantly. But because we are experiencing it, we cannot possibly study it to any degree beyond proving that it exists. The mind IS time.

So your saying that in a universe where nothing is impossible, something actually IS impossible?

Wait, what are you talking about? Of course there are impossible things in the universe. I won't describe in detail, but, for example, literally I will never be able to spontaneously (as in entirely spontaneously) warp from my current position into the vast distance lightyears away. Theoretically it would be possible for me to travel there (obviously not with current technology). If I'm sitting in a finite container (I.E. the universe, assuming it's finite which is only logical), there are not infinite possibilities. Thus things are impossible if they are not a possibility.

~D-Draw

Quote from: "Wolfwood"

So your saying that in a universe where nothing is impossible, something actually IS impossible?

Wait, what are you talking about? Of course there are impossible things in the universe. I won't describe in detail, but, for example, literally I will never be able to spontaneously (as in entirely spontaneously) warp from my current position into the vast distance lightyears away. Theoretically it would be possible for me to travel there (obviously not with current technology). If I'm sitting in a finite container (I.E. the universe, assuming it's finite which is only logical), there are not infinite possibilities. Thus things are impossible if they are not a possibility.

~D-Draw

Everything's possible.  Just because you can't think of the process/way doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Why do we assume that the Universe is finite?  It is acceptable that Time is at least limited in one direction, but what of the 3 spatial directions?  Why must they be finite?

Everything's possible.

This is a very common misconception that people seem to have.  Anything that is not logically possible is impossible, whereas anything that is not logically impossible is possible.

Thus, it's possible that I have the capacity to drink the entire volume of water contained in all the earth's oceans in a quarter of a second (although very unlikely), but it's impossible for me to draw a three-sided octagon.  Also, anything that doesn't pass Aristotle's 'law of noncontradiction' is impossible.

Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"

Everything's possible.

This is a very common misconception that people seem to have.  Anything that is not logically possible is impossible, whereas anything that is not logically impossible is possible.

Thus, it's possible that I have the capacity to drink the entire volume of water contained in all the earth's oceans in a quarter of a second (although very unlikely), but it's impossible for me to draw a three-sided octagon.  Also, anything that doesn't pass Aristotle's 'law of noncontradiction' is impossible.

I'm very glad that you left out this part:
Just because you can't think of the process/way doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Did I need to specifically quote that from you BOG?  You made the claim that everything was possible, and I was simply pointing out to you that there are an infinite number of things that are impossible a priori.  That means that the statement "Everything's possible" is false.

Did I need to specifically quote that from you BOG?  You made the claim that everything was possible, and I was simply pointing out to you that there are an infinite number of things that are impossible a priori.  That means that the statement "Everything's possible" is false.

I just gave you a reason as to why you THINK things are impossible.

Wouldn't a 3-sided octagon have 3 sides?