# Infinite past... with a beginning?

just me said:
If an instant can exist before forever in the past, infinite time could have begun in that instant.

How does this ( highlighted ) make sense ?

Okay. I'll bite.

1. Assume there is an infinite past.
2. An infinite past means that for every instant in time there is an earlier instant.
3. Assume there is a beginning that happened at a particular instant in time.
4. A beginning is an instant in time prior to which there are no instants in time.
5. By (2), there must be an instant in time earlier than the time of the beginning.
7. Therefore, if all of the above is valid, then there can be no infinite past with a beginning, since the notion that both things can exist simultaneously leads to contradiction - a logical impossibility.

I think that's a "proper" argument.

The argument can be attacked on several fronts, of course. One way would be to claim that (3) is false, and that the "beginning" can be at an indetermine time rather than representing a fixed instant in time. Another is to object to one or both of the definitions in (2) and (4).

As usual... SP left things as vague, unrestricted, and loose to interpretation as the measure of or standard for "heap" in a sorites paradox. So the responder does indeed get to set the details, and any external objections about the replier's selection of premises and meanings are irrelevant. What matters is whether or not your arrangement is internally consistent with its own assertions and conclusion drawn from them. Not whether an _X_ is true, false, or illicit with respect to another person's system, choices, preferences, views or even any supposed facts of the world in the context of a topic's request.

How does this ( highlighted ) make sense ?

There is an amount of time into the past that can be bigger than an infinite amount of time into the past, and that is an infinite amount of time into the past.

Infinity plus any positive integer is equal to infinity

just me said:
If an instant can exist before forever in the past, infinite time could have begun in that instant.
I always imagined that an infinity without time translates into a single instant of "now" containing all abstract universal mathematical potentials in a singularity and a resulting mathematical imperative for expression via a mega-quantum event AKA Big Bang.

Ok, that'll stir the pot, no doubt.

New
just me said:
If an instant can exist before forever in the past, infinite time could have begun in that instant.

I always imagined that an infinity without time translates into a single instant of "now" containing all abstract universal mathematical potentials in a singularity and a resulting mathematical imperative for expression via a mega-quantum event AKA Big Bang.

Ok, that'll stir the pot, no doubt.

No doubt to your last statement .

Above that , so a singularity results in a ; mega-quantum event .

Explain further . This .

No doubt to your last statement .

Above that , so a singularity results in a ; mega-quantum event .

Explain further . This .

Write4U said:
I always imagined that an infinity without time translates into a single instant of "now" containing all abstract universal mathematical potentials in a singularity and a resulting mathematical imperative for expression via a mega-quantum event AKA Big Bang.

Ok, that'll stir the pot, no doubt.

To add , physically , how is the singularity possible ? What came before the singularity ?

Some people seem to view the notion of an infinite past with a beginning as impossible. Anyone can argue this impossibility properly?
EB

I am not sure whether this has been mentioned yet but even a time duration of 1 second can be considered as infinite. If you take any duration and divide by infinity you end up with the infinitesimal.

The apparent contradiction of Infinitely Finite comes to mind...
Take any finite sphere for example and note that it can be considered as infinitely composed of infinitesimal dimensions.

So yes an infinite past can logically have a beginning..

Speakpigeon said:
Some people seem to view the notion of an infinite past with a beginning as impossible. Anyone can argue this impossibility properly?
EB
If the OP had included a time metric like a second or hour etc and asked whether an infinite number of past hours could have a beginning then no, it is not logically possible. However what makes it intriguing is that every arbitrary second or hour ( infinitely finite moment) could be stated as having a beginning and an end. Yet each remain infinite, made up of infinitesimal lengths of time.

So an infinite past can have an infinite number of beginnings and ends

To add , physically , how is the singularity possible ? What came before the singularity ?
Infinity condensed in a single instant, a singularity. Seems to me something 's gotta give. Boom.

river said:
To add , physically , how is the singularity possible ? What came before the singularity ?

Infinity condensed in a single instant, a singularity. Seems to me something 's gotta give. Boom.

I read , but don't understand .

So infinity condensed ? ( what infinity is condensed in a single instant ? ) Explain in-depth.

Last edited:
I read , but don't understand .

So infinity condensed ? ( what infinity is condensed in a single instant ? ) Explain in-depth.

First, in a timeless potential any emergent dynamic action constitutes the first instance of a emergent timeframe associated with that dynamic action. When there is no prior time, every dynamic instant would be the first instant.

Think of a black hole, where entire blocks of spacetime are drawn in and condensed into incredibly massive patterns at the center of the BH.

Assuming that infinity has potential, an intrinsic abstract quality with a value. Imagine this value collapsing into itself, somewhat similar as a BH and condensing this value into a dynamic infinitely dense singularity.

An atom bomb can only be exploded by creating an inward explosion which starts the nuclear reaction. I see this mathematical function of collapse as being causal to the origin of the BB. An inward collapse, creating an immeasurably dense singularity and subsequently violent expansion as chaotic energetic spacetime.

Infinity collapsing into itself and creating a mega-quantum event the BB, and the creation of all the potential physical properties of the spacetime. During cooling, the formation of mass in accordance to E = Mc^2

I know this is speculative, but are there any alternative hypotheses? If so, I want to see them.

So an infinite past can have an infinite number of beginnings and ends
Actually, in a timeless condition any first measurable instant of time associated change is the begining of time.

Before then there is no time, i.e. during any first change, timelessness (0) resolves in to a Fibonaccy sequence. (0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, etc.)

Write4U:

First, in a timeless potential...
What is a timeless potential?

... any emergent dynamic action constitutes the first instance of a emergent timeframe associated with that dynamic action.
An action constitutes a timeframe? Please explain.

When there is no prior time, every dynamic instant would be the first instant.

Think of a black hole, where entire blocks of spacetime are drawn in and condensed into incredibly massive patterns at the center of the BH.
Matter is drawn into black holes. I'm not so sure about "blocks of spacetime". What is a block of spacetime? I wasn't aware that it came in blocks.

Assuming that infinity has potential...
What does that even mean?

..., an intrinsic abstract quality with a value.
Intrinsic to what?
How can a quality have a value? Please explain.

Imagine this value collapsing into itself, somewhat similar as a BH and condensing this value into a dynamic infinitely dense singularity.
Please explain how a value can collapse. While you're at it, please define "value", because you seem to be using that word in a strange way.

An atom bomb can only be exploded by creating an inward explosion which starts the nuclear reaction.
If it's a fission bomb, the aim is to construct a critical mass, so as to enable a nuclear chain reaction. If it's a fusion bomb, the aim is usually to compress and heat the material sufficiently for fusion to occur.

I see this mathematical function of collapse as being causal to the origin of the BB.
Mathematics is an abstraction. How can anything mathematical cause a real-world physical event?

Infinity collapsing into itself ...
Infinity is a sort of number, isn't it? One of those mathematical abstractions. How can a number collapse? What would the collapse of the number 17 look like?

I know this is speculative, but are there any alternative hypotheses?
Hypotheses to explain what?

Before then there is no time, i.e. during any first change, timelessness (0) resolves in to a Fibonaccy sequence. (0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, etc.)
This sounds like complete nonsense.

Please explain how and why, in detail.

First, in a timeless potential any emergent dynamic action constitutes the first instance of a emergent timeframe associated with that dynamic action. When there is no prior time, every dynamic instant would be the first instant.

Think of a black hole, where entire blocks of spacetime are drawn in and condensed into incredibly massive patterns at the center of the BH.

Assuming that infinity has potential, an intrinsic abstract quality with a value. Imagine this value collapsing into itself, somewhat similar as a BH and condensing this value into a dynamic infinitely dense singularity.

An atom bomb can only be exploded by creating an inward explosion which starts the nuclear reaction. I see this mathematical function of collapse as being causal to the origin of the BB. An inward collapse, creating an immeasurably dense singularity and subsequently violent expansion as chaotic energetic spacetime.

Infinity collapsing into itself and creating a mega-quantum event the BB, and the creation of all the potential physical properties of the spacetime. During cooling, the formation of mass in accordance to E = Mc^2

I know this is speculative, but are there any alternative hypotheses? If so, I want to see them.
BINGO!
BINGO!
BINGO!
BINGO!

BINGO!
BINGO!
BINGO!
BINGO!
But nothing to replace my proposals, right? It's easy to say Bingo when you have nothing else to offer.
Put up or be courteous. Right now you are just being boring. Go play some bingo if you are so enamored with that word.

Please note that I qualified everything as speculative on my part. I do not pretend to have proofs.
W4U said; First, in a timeless potential...
James R said; What is a timeless potential?
The definition of potential is "that which may become reality", i.e. potential is not physical and therefore not causal to the emergence of time.
W4U said:... any emergent dynamic action constitutes the first instance of a emergent timeframe associated with that dynamic action.
JR said: An action constitutes a timeframe? Please explain.
IMO, time emerges as a result of duration of change (action). In a completely static universe, time would not exist
W4U said; When there is no prior time, every dynamic instant would be causal to the first instant of time associated with that action.
JR said: Please define "dynamic instant".
Sorry, that should read dynamic action. An instantiation (emergence) of time in relation to a dynamic action.
W4U said: Think of a black hole, where entire blocks of spacetime are drawn in and condensed into incredibly massive patterns at the center of the BH.
JR said: Matter is drawn into black holes. I'm not so sure about "blocks of spacetime". What is a block of spacetime? I wasn't aware that it came in blocks.
I suspect that entire areas of spacetime itself are drawn into a BH. Hence my use of "blocks".
W4U said: Assuming that infinity has potential...
JR said: What does that even mean?
IMO, potential is a mathematical latency contained in everything regardless of size, from Infinity to Planck scale. I see Pi and Phi as infinite potentials.
W4U said:..., an intrinsic abstract quality with a value.
JR said: Intrinsic to what?
Everything.
JR said: How can a quality have a value? Please explain.
A quality is a measurement with a specific value, i.e. the color quality of red consists of a mathematical value
W4U said; Imagine this value collapsing into itself, somewhat similar as a BH and condensing this value into a dynamic infinitely dense singularity.
JR said: Please explain how a value can collapse. While you're at it, please define "value", because you seem to be using that word in a strange way.
Value = a quality that can be measured mathematically as a real property or as a potential.
W4U said: An atom bomb can only be exploded by creating an inward explosion which starts the nuclear reaction.
JR said; If it's a fission bomb, the aim is to construct a critical mass, so as to enable a nuclear chain reaction. If it's a fusion bomb, the aim is usually to compress and heat the material sufficiently for fusion to occur.
W4U said: I see this mathematical function of collapse as being causal to the origin of the BB.
JR said: Mathematics is an abstraction. How can anything mathematical cause a real-world physical event?
Collapse from one physical state into another pysical state is a mathematical function.
Perhaps a mathematical function might collapse metaphysical state into a physical state?
W4U said; Infinity collapsing into itself ...
JR said: Infinity is a sort of number, isn't it? One of those mathematical abstractions. How can a number collapse? What would the collapse of the number 17 look like?
Throw a 17 lb massive rock in a BH and watch it become infinitely small while maintaining its mathematical value.
Pi is an irrational number which can be infinitely large or infinitely small.
Assume a state of being infinitely large collapsing into an infinitely small singularity, or something like it. (note; this is probative rather than declarative.)
W4U said; I know this is speculative, but are there any alternative hypotheses?
JR said: Hypotheses to explain what?
The causality of the BB. Please note that I am not advocating for an motivated supernatural intelligence. It is my attemp to seek a scientific explanation for the event, if it had any causality at all, which to me it should have.

I believe in self-organization, but before the BB, what could possible have self-organized, unless it is of a mathematical nature.
W4U said: Before then there is no time, i.e. during any first change, timelessness (0) resolves in to a Fibonaccy sequence. (0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, etc.)
JR said: This sounds like complete nonsense. Please explain how and why, in detail.W4U
Hehe,
This is a free interpretation of Bohmian Mechanics which postulates a mathematical self-referential function between future and the past events. The Fibonacci Sequence seems to fill that mathematical requirement.
In mathematics, the Fibonacci numbers, commonly denoted Fn, form a sequence, called the Fibonacci sequence, such that each number is the sum of the two preceding ones, starting from 0 and 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number
Each new number is the exponential result of the addition of the present number and the immediate prior past number, etc. To me that makes sense, because I cannot see a relationship between the present and a distant past. i.e. the Fibonacci sequence is the perfect mathematical function for such self-referential action.

Ok, I'm sure this is full of errors, but hopefully none are fatal to the conceptualization of a more realistic answer than a magical sky daddy creator, which is obviously fundamentally flawed.

I understand that metaphysics is not ruled out as a universal potential. Mathematics are metaphysical and to my knowledge Tegmark has the only theory of a mathematical universe that potentially could lead to real answers. He postulates that all physical things are no more than mathematically arranged patterns in accordance with 32 relative "values" and a few handfulls of equations (constant functions). I cannot conceive of any other logical explanation of how the universe might self-assemble into the patterns we see today.

Proof of this lies in the presence of the Fibonacci sequence throughout the known universe.

If there are other current theories for the causality of the BB, I am not aware of it. If there is none then what is the harm in a speculative probe? I am not claiming anything other than a speculative proposition, which may strike a resonant chord here or there in more educated minds than mine.

I am not presenting a formal scientific hypothesis. I am asking for a tolerant examination of possible logical implications of these thoughts.

This is why I posted this in the hopefully appropriate sub-forum. I am here to learn, not to instruct.

Last edited:
This may be of interest.

Implicit function theorem
In mathematics, more specifically in multivariable calculus, the implicit function theorem[1] is a tool that allows relations to be converted to functions of several real variables. It does so by representing the relation as the graph of a function. There may not be a single function whose graph can represent the entire relation, but there may be such a function on a restriction of the domain of the relation. The implicit function theorem gives a sufficient condition to ensure that there is such a function.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_function_theorem

I'm not sure what to make of this, but the term "implicit" struck me. It is a major theme in Bohmian Mechanics. "Wholeness and the Implicate Order".
Seems like a metaphysical condition based on inherent potentials.

Ok, I'm sure this is full of errors.

Indeed.

I am asking for a tolerant examination of possible logical implications of these thoughts.

There are none. It is impossible to extract enough meaning from what you have written to apply logical thought to it.

I am here to learn, not to instruct.

It seems to me you are here to preach a pseudo-mathematical cargo-cult religion, derived from your lack of understanding of mathematics.

It's a great pity. Five years ago you were making sense - I looked back at Futilitist's threads on his great oil "apocalypse" the other day (whatever happened to that? ) and you were making valuable contributions.