[loarevalo]

Originally Posted by EWright

If on a numberline we can go from zero to a positive direction for eternity, and a negative direction for eternity... then wouldn't the half way point of all eternity = 0 = nothing?

I saw yesterday the movie "I love huckabees" - besides being funny, it's very enlightening. Existentialism tries to explain eternity or infinity in terms of existing on earth - you should see it.

I would rather see the midpoint of everything as 1. In the absolute scale of numbers, you start at nothing, and end at everything, being in the middle "unity" or 1. Of course, you could deem the numbers less than 1 as being mirrored from numbers greater than 1, so then you can begin at 1 and end at the absolute multiplicity - everything. But that absolute multiplicity would be complete and therefore philosophically a "unity." So we go from 1 to 1, or everything to everything, eternity to eternity.

We can think of the universe as separated, or catalogued, or numbered, yet the belief is that everything is part of the absolute unity/everything. "Everything is connected." No matter how hard we try, we can't create anything - we just organize - those are the laws of conservation.

If we can't separate and catalogue eternity, is because eternity cannot be divided in finite terms - and we can only think in finite terms. Who can concieve what eternity is? We understand things in discreet ways.

We see all things as having a beginning and an end - that may be the flaw in we trying to divide eternity.

[geokker]

Obviously INF/2 = INF and INF +1 = INF and INF + INF = INF

My point is that forever is forever. It cannot be divided otherwise, it wouldn't be forever. So, if the nature of time beyond our natural lives is equitable, it cannot be said fairly to be infinite as our natural lives would have to be a divisible fraction to be distinct.

[EWright]

Originally Posted by geokker

My point is that forever is forever. It cannot be divided otherwise, it wouldn't be forever. So, if the nature of time beyond our natural lives is equitable, it cannot be said fairly to be infinite as our natural lives would have to be a divisible fraction to be distinct.

What about INF/0? If the universe is infinite in size, how was it ever smaller than it is and how it is that it is expanding? If Heaven is eternal, how can we experience our first day their? If time is infinite, how was there a beginning to any one thing, including the universe itself?

[infamous]

Originally Posted by EWright

What about INF/0? If the universe is infinite in size, how was it ever smaller than it is and how it is that it is expanding?

Defining the universe as infinite does not preclude the distance between objects from expanding.

Originally Posted by EWright

If Heaven is eternal, how can we experience our first day their?

It is entirely possible for eternity to have a beginning event followed by an infinite number of successive events.

Originally Posted by EWright

If time is infinite, how was there a beginning to any one thing, including the universe itself?

Time can be defined as the passage of events, so when questioning weather time is infinite or not, it is really asking the same question as was posed in your second question about eternity. Having a beginning does not prevent eternity so long as following events never cease.

[loarevalo]

Originally Posted by geokker

My point is that forever is forever. It cannot be divided otherwise, it wouldn't be forever. So, if the nature of time beyond our natural lives is equitable, it cannot be said fairly to be infinite as our natural lives would have to be a divisible fraction to be distinct.

Under an eternal perspective, our lives are as a "point" in the continuum of infinite time. Nevertheless, here we're still interpreting "eternity" like "infinite time," which aren't necesarily equivalent. Eternity, is by definition of eastern religions, incomprehensible - that is, until one gets to eternity or has achieved "illumination." Their ideas about eternity are very interesting - I think there's worth in asking this thread's questions in context of that philosophy.

Eastern philosphy would say that the mere thought of separation, discreteness, distinction, is an illusion. In the realm of eternity, there is only oneness, all in all and there are no "divisions." From an initial primitive idea that "everything is connected" (watch the movie "I love huckabees") comes the ultimate truth that "everything is one."

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by infamous

It is entirely possible for eternity to have a beginning event followed by an infinite number of successive events.

Indeed, is a totally different concept than .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinit..._real_analysis

[alxian]

the amount of time it takes your life to flash before your eyes and the time it takes for her to realize what you just said.

the other half of forever being the hellish aftermath...


for a good example you can check out the NN archives for michelle pantolianos story about her trip to the video store with her fiancee.. quite an interesting story.

[C1ay]

eternity

[geokker]

I think it's important to remember just how big forever is. The factorial of a trillion trillion years is not even the smallest fraction of the span of forever. In fact - it isn't and cannot be. Forever is impregnable by definition. Philosophically, the 80 year old man has lived a meaningless and pointless existence in the face of an eternal life. Those who believe in oblivion as a flavour, may have a point when they maintain that their lives on Earth mean more.

[nkt]

It's still a very long time.