Time: if you reach backwards in the time dimension (as if time were a spatial dimension), time either began or never began, going on backwards for infinity. The dilemma is between an illogical starting point of time and infinite time. How could time start (an event happening using time) before time started?
We could think of a universe without time having some inherently necessary explosion which begins time, but without time to in the original universe, time doesn't seem all that necessary.
Cause effect: now we reach backwards using logic rather than a dimension. All things have a cause; there's a mechanical position of the universe that preceded and caused the current position. (ooooh! this brings up so many ideas about inertia!) This method also deals with infinity. We either have an infinite number of mechanical states, or there was some 'first cause' that didn't/doesn't have a cause, i.e. God. It would make sense that this first cause must be unaffected by/greater than time.
Both theories deal with a dilemma and both bring us back to the start of the universe. However, the reasonings behind the dilemmas seem to be different, and I know with great certainty that the methods of reaching back into time are different.
P.S. both of these arguments also have the potential to reach forward in time. Using the dimension, time must either end sometime (scary) or never end (depressing). Cause-effect logic demands results from each mechanical state, and hence another one after any given state. The chain does not seem to end.
No comments:
Post a Comment