Replies

"Are you suggesting that by some fluke, that at one point actual time did not exist, that seconds, and hours, and days and all other units of time were simply meaningless. That is impossible with the fact that the space the universe is now contained in must have existed forever."

The universe is not contained in any space. Space and time exist within our universe. The universe contains -everything- we observe: space, planets, stars, time, matter is all part of the universe.
If time began at the start of the universe, then there is no such thing as "before the universe", because a point cannot exist in time without time existing.

"The phrase "beginning of time" is not literal, rather it refers to the point where the universe was created upon the number line of time. Time cannot simply exist at one point and then *poof* not exist.
The universe contains "everything" and this includes time.
Time is a part of the universe so whenever time has existed, so has the universe. What you are talking about is that for an infinite amount of years no space, stars or planets existed. Your creation event is not the beginning of the universe, it is the beginning of space and matter. In this regard you are essentially saying that the universe has existed forever, but only very recently has matter and space appeared.

"I drop a can. Gravity causes the can to fall. Therefore gravity exists. Saying that the laws of physics can suddenly not exist is more of a leap of faith than I am willing to take."
You have only demonstrated that the law of gravity worked in that one example. You only assume on faith that it will again, and does elsewhere in the galaxy. But it is unreasonable to assume otherwise.

"And yet your theory that time at one point did not exist has zero evidence to support it, whereas my theory that the laws of physics are, and must remain a constant does have evidence to support it."
Well space and time are pretty intertwined with one another. I imagine that it is a large possibility that before space existed, neither did time. Especially considering there would be no frame of reference for it to exist.

"This is a very poor analogy. In this analogy a tape measure is used to represent time. On your tape measure we know that there are points that are not marked. For example, there is no -1 in."
Okay if you want to get picky then say the tape measure is a gradient of color from blue to red. You make the rule "each color is preceeded by a bluer one". But the beginning of the tape measure is unique, it is pure blue and no possible bluer color preceeding it.

First let me say I'm really enjoying debating with you. I live in rural Oklahoma where everyone agrees with me most of the time, so this is really quite refreshing.

"The universe is not contained in any space. Space and time exist within our universe. The universe contains -everything- we observe: space, planets, stars, time, matter is all part of the universe.
If time began at the start of the universe, then there is no such thing as "before the universe", because a point cannot exist in time without time existing."

Ok then... The space within the Universe, that contains the Universe has always existed then. One of the theories that is often advanced, is that the universe is always expanding. If this is so, then there must be space outside it that it expands into. So that space must have also always existed. If there is any distinction between the spaces inside and outside of the universe, they both must have always existed. To suggest otherwise, means that the universe is actually creating space.but in any case since space must exist outside the universe, then time must also exist outside the universe.

"The universe is not contained in any space. Space and time exist within our universe. The universe contains -everything- we observe: space, planets, stars, time, matter is all part of the universe.
If time began at the start of the universe, then there is no such thing as "before the universe", because a point cannot exist in time without time existing."

In the last argument i proved that the universe *is* contained inside space. So this entire argument also falls, because your given is flawed.

"You have only demonstrated that the law of gravity worked in that one example. You only assume on faith that it will again, and does elsewhere in the galaxy. But it is unreasonable to assume otherwise."

So is it logical to assume that every time that I drop the can that i should expect the can to merely float in space where i dropped it, or perhaps float away from the earth? I should think not. There was zero evidence for this theory when you submitted it originally, there is still zero evidence supporting it now.When I drop article X close to another large mass, (such as the earth,) then article X will be very powerfully gravitated toward that object. So for another example, the star "Proxima Centauri" has a force exerted upon it by the sun, and vice versa. In the same way every other mass within the universe exerts a force on every other mass in the universe.

"Well space and time are pretty intertwined with one another. I imagine that it is a large possibility that before space existed, neither did time. Especially considering there would be no frame of reference for it to exist."

Once again I've already proved that a certain sort of space, (if there is a distinction between it and the space we are familiar with) must exist therefore your given is flawed, and this argument falls.

"Okay if you want to get picky then say the tape measure is a gradient of color from blue to red. You make the rule "each color is preceeded by a bluer one". But the beginning of the tape measure is unique, it is pure blue and no possible bluer color preceeding it."

No that is false, because at the point just before blue, the color would proceed on to violet and colors that you could not see with the naked eye, and the red side would go on toward infrared colors.