<!--QuoteBegin-Align+Jun 13 2005, 01:36 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Align @ Jun 13 2005, 01:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> So how does that explain anything? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why does everything NEED to be explained in the first place? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
"Time" is only a word created by man to keep track of events in chronological order, and to keep us sane with managing crap.
"Time" has existed forever; for infinity. Before the "Big Bang" is a period in "Time", in space.
Yes it did exist, but it held no meaning. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Without meaning such a word means nothing.
Therefore time is nothing before it was given meaning.
When there is no meaning behind a word it doesn't exist.
Japanese has meaning behind it, even if you don't understand it, time has never has such a luxury there was a time when there was no meaning. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndane+Jun 13 2005, 07:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Jun 13 2005, 07:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You don't get it aliencow...
When there is no meaning behind a word it doesn't exist.
Japanese has meaning behind it, even if you don't understand it, time has never has such a luxury there was a time when there was no meaning. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> GOD STOP DODGING THE POINT
What you're saying is equivalent to saying that the world DIDN'T EXIST before humans evolved, which would mean that humans COULDN'T have evolved. Obviously this is NOT the case. Nobody cares about all that philosophical junk, it's not what's interesting. It's like that painting of a pipe saying "this is not a pipe", I mean, jesus, of course its not a REAL pipe, who cares?
Now. Try to explain how the <b>object</b> time, which doesn't need a name to exist, could pass if there was nothing which could be affected by it. And how matter could suddenly start existing. You can't.
Which is why I believe in <u>a</u> god, or god-like entity. Something outside of this universe, not bound by the natural laws. It wouldn't NEED to be created, because it could have always existed, which our minds simply cannot grasp; our minds are bound by the natural order of things, haven't ever seen anything outside the natural order of things, and couldn't ever understand anything that is.
<!--QuoteBegin-Align+Jun 13 2005, 01:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Align @ Jun 13 2005, 01:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I suppose it would get filtered out by our brains so that we wouldn't go insane, if we got a chance to look at infinity... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Reminds me of the second Hitchhiker's Guide. The multidimensional, "unlimited perspective" one.
ThansalThe New ScumJoin Date: 2002-08-22Member: 1215Members, Constellation
/me looks at every one
why does every one take the big bang as the start of everything.
we know there are other universes the predate the big bang (assuming it happened)
inafact, space is infinatly vast (we think), then there must be other sentient life forms, infact there must be other sentient life forms that existed before us. (yay for infinate probabilities!)
thus time has nothing to do with the big bang as other sentient beings must have measured time long before the big bang happened...
<!--QuoteBegin-Thansal+Jun 13 2005, 08:39 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Thansal @ Jun 13 2005, 08:39 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> we know there are other universes the predate the big bang <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> We do? <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->inafact, space is infinatly vast (we think), then there must be other sentient life forms, infact there must be other sentient life forms that existed before us. (yay for infinate probabilities!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->No, there may be an infinite amount of emptiness outside the borders of the universe, but there's a finite amount of matter.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->thus time has nothing to do with the big bang as other sentient beings must have measured time long before the big bang happened...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->So what existed before them, and what existed before that? Etc.
Time is all relative to points of refence. So this is the answer to the question:
There was no beginning to existance it's just here and we're in it. Time is as old as existance which is forever. Since there is no beginning or end to existance there is none for time. Time now is based on relative positions in it. Like we say it's the year 2005 .. but that's only from the birth of christ ( and cause it's easier to write than 10x10^infinity +1). So if you want to mark the beginning of time in our context it was the big bang.
I don't follow all of this malarkey. In my eyes its bloody simple. Time is something that always exists, whether anyones there or not. If the universe is destroyed the timeline will continue regardless. Before the universe the timeline was already up and running.
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndane+Jun 13 2005, 07:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Jun 13 2005, 07:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Thusly, time is relative if you are animal, or not.
:-)
Philosophy > Physics/Mathematics <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> First i felt the deep desire to look at you in a very angry way and snort at the same time <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> but i decided otherwise, so feel happy about not beeing snorted at <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
What do mathematics and philosophy have in common? Both are cheating. And what do they not have in common? Mathematics itself tells you that it is cheating, but philosophy claims that it is founded on basic logic. (Oh the irony)
Edit: And just for fun: The existence started to exist with my first memory. (I just said, that you all are meaningless and i bet that ~50% of you wouldnt even notice witheout this little line)
You know, Cyn, much as I enjoy the flinging of semi-cryptic fragements of thought from time to time, you should be able to back your conclusions up with reasoning, which you have not so far.
To get this back onto the plane of reality, what some, most prominently Alien Cow, express in here is a 19th century concept of time as a static, unchangeable 'line' running from eternity to eternity. This concept died with the advent of the theory of relativity. Einstein made it clear that time and space are connected, are "timespace"; two vectors on the same plane. The faster you move through space, the slower time progresses for you. Great masses can warp time as well as space.
Keep this in mind: Time and space are one.
Now realize this: The Big Bang marks not the expansion of a whole lot of matter compressed into tiny bit of space into the universe, but the creation of space <i>itself</i> in the first place. There was no space before the Big Bang. None. And conversely, there could be no time, nor any law of nature based on either, which just about demolishes every single one we know. The Big Bang was the beginning of this universe; not only of a big bubble of existence, but of <i>everything</i> we have so far perceived, including the concept of existence. Whether there have been universes before the Big Bang does in so far not make much of a difference - they were culled, removed, when their spacetime disappeared; we have no way of determining their nature from our perspective.
So, time, as well as space, began with this universe. <i>How</i> it began, <i>why</i> it began, lies outside the reach of science or any other human faculty but faith.
<!--QuoteBegin-Nemesis Zero+Jun 14 2005, 12:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jun 14 2005, 12:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Einstein made it clear that time and space are connected, are "timespace"; two vectors on the same plane. The faster you move through space, the slower time progresses for you. Great masses can warp time as well as space.
Keep this in mind: Time and space are one.
Now realize this: The Big Bang marks not the expansion of a whole lot of matter compressed into tiny bit of space into the universe, but the creation of space <i>itself</i> in the first place. There was no space before the Big Bang. None. And conversely, there could be no time, nor any law of nature based on either, which just about demolishes every single one we know. The Big Bang was the beginning of this universe; not only of a big bubble of existence, but of <i>everything</i> we have so far perceived, including the concept of existence. Whether there have been universes before the Big Bang does in so far not make much of a difference - they were culled, removed, when their spacetime disappeared; we have no way of determining their nature from our perspective.
So, time, as well as space, began with this universe. <i>How</i> it began, <i>why</i> it began, lies outside the reach of science or any other human faculty but faith. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yay thanks Nem! That was what I was trying to say in the first place! Could we end in the solution that time started same exactly same moment as big bang, just because there was NOTHING before it! But then there is the question how and what big bang was if it wasn`t existing before explosion? I also concluded that the Expanding of the space actually is same as Time!
What if time really has existed infintely, without beginning? Think about it. Time is a relative measurment. It may not have had anything to measure before the big bang, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there.
It comes back to "If a tree falls and no one hears it, does it make a sound?"
On the other hand, since time is a relative measurement, maybe it only started to exist when the first thing to measure it existed (note that inanimate objects count). In that case, it started to exist at the exact moment of the big bang.
But, what if there was something before the big bang? pre-matter, as some have pointed out in other threads about this.
Frankly, I think it's an insoluble problem until we somehow manage to know for certain how the universe started.
<!--QuoteBegin-ReK+Jun 14 2005, 06:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (ReK @ Jun 14 2005, 06:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What if time really has existed infintely, without beginning? Think about it. Time is a relative measurment. It may not have had anything to measure before the big bang, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> No, you're contradicting yourself.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->On the other hand, since time is a relative measurement, maybe it only started to exist when the first thing to measure it existed (note that inanimate objects count). In that case, it started to exist at the exact moment of the big bang.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's better; time is relative.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But, what if there was something before the big bang? pre-matter, as some have pointed out in other threads about this.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If time began at the big bang then <i>by definition</i> nothing happened before it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
MouseThe Lighter Side of PessimismJoin Date: 2002-03-02Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
edited June 2005
It was mentioned earlier, that you can't have time without space, as they're the same thing. This is true to a degree; a more accurate statement would proably be, you cannot percieve time without space; it's something we just can't get our head around.
How do you percieve a change in time; you look for movement. How can you tell if something is moving; you look for a change in position over time. etc. etc.
So, back to the big bang. For an immeasurably short instant; nothing existed in the the three dimensions of space. Does that mean that time didn't exist? No, it just means at that immeasurably short moment, there was nothing to compare time against. Time itself still existed, there just wasn't the means to quantify it.
Hell, suppose time 'stopped' right now. given the spacial information available to you, you'd be unable to show that time ever existed.
At the immeasurably short instant of the big bang, time still existed, the three spacial dimensions did too for that matter. It's just that there was no way to verify their existance.
[EDIT] Addendum: Dimensions cannot be destroyed, they are infinite. Even if at a given moment a dimension is empty, the potential for it to not be empty still exists.
Hay guys wasn't the big bang the explosion of a giant "first star"? Wouldn't that mean there was matter before the big bang? Wouldn't that also mean there was time along with it?
saying that there was no space before the "big bang" isnt believable at all.. did a scientist make that up or did you? the "big bang" had to be cause by something... matter cant be created or destroyed as some say... well then... how/why did the "big bang" happen... its just some fubar theory that i have no possibility of believing in just like creation... thats why "big bang" is in quotes... i dont believe it...
cyndane.. well i guess plenty of other people have addressed your idea of time... the question isnt about when the word came to be its about when the object of time came to be... the thing called time...
edit: ugh cyndane cmon... the question isnt about philosophy... who cares when things decided to start scheduling around time and when the word came to be... im pretty sure align beat the hell out of you and your philosophicalations... its just like saying something doesnt exist before the word is invented with meaning behind it... i cant really think of an example right now but suppose the first person who came up with a name for "fire" did fire not exist before the word? it obviously did.... bah... cant believe im editing my post after saying i was gonna drop it.. my conclusion is i hate you all <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
anyway.. ive just repeated most of the stuff said already and this threads getting pretty watered down..
my plan is to just forget about it since it doesnt make one bit of difference to me... for real.. no use at all.. just drop it..
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited June 2005
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndane+Jun 14 2005, 05:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Jun 14 2005, 05:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Nemmy, I always win in a philosophical debate darling. :-) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And what if we argue that the universe itself, by the processes forming life, is intelligent and even self-consious?
But Cyn, you are restricting the definition of time to the regular measurement of change, which I agree didn't happen before intelligent life. However ime is, quite probably according to modern science, a dimension and property of space just as the three other spatial dimensions are (width, height, depth).
So by your view, you are also restricting these three properties as something available only to intelligent life, and thus you are colapsing space into an undimensioned blob.
I believe you confuse the measurement of a property with the actual property. Yes, we defined what an hour was, but that hour still took place before we measured it. It's much like saying the elephant had no size before intelligent life defined size. And with no size or physical span, it would collapse into a miniature black hole.
Now, if you argue that nothing exists before you see it, you are venturing into a completely different area of philosophy, but I don't see how you can assign existence to observation without restricting it to your own observations only.
Comments
Why does everything NEED to be explained in the first place? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
"Time" is only a word created by man to keep track of events in chronological order, and to keep us sane with managing crap.
"Time" has existed forever; for infinity. Before the "Big Bang" is a period in "Time", in space.
Now this turned into philosophy :s
Without meaning such a word means nothing.
Therefore time is nothing before it was given meaning.
When there is no meaning behind a word it doesn't exist.
Japanese has meaning behind it, even if you don't understand it, time has never has such a luxury there was a time when there was no meaning. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I said no.
When there is no meaning behind a word it doesn't exist.
Japanese has meaning behind it, even if you don't understand it, time has never has such a luxury there was a time when there was no meaning. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
GOD STOP DODGING THE POINT
What you're saying is equivalent to saying that the world DIDN'T EXIST before humans evolved, which would mean that humans COULDN'T have evolved. Obviously this is NOT the case.
Nobody cares about all that philosophical junk, it's not what's interesting. It's like that painting of a pipe saying "this is not a pipe", I mean, jesus, of course its not a REAL pipe, who cares?
Now. Try to explain how the <b>object</b> time, which doesn't need a name to exist, could pass if there was nothing which could be affected by it. And how matter could suddenly start existing.
You can't.
Which is why I believe in <u>a</u> god, or god-like entity. Something outside of this universe, not bound by the natural laws. It wouldn't NEED to be created, because it could have always existed, which our minds simply cannot grasp; our minds are bound by the natural order of things, haven't ever seen anything outside the natural order of things, and couldn't ever understand anything that is.
Time didn't exist untill a life form used it.
Philosophy is fun no?
I haven't even mentioned the physics/mathematics behind the object known as "time".
Nor will I, for that really doesn't intrest me that mucn.
Reminds me of the second Hitchhiker's Guide. The multidimensional, "unlimited perspective" one.
why does every one take the big bang as the start of everything.
we know there are other universes the predate the big bang (assuming it happened)
inafact, space is infinatly vast (we think), then there must be other sentient life forms, infact there must be other sentient life forms that existed before us. (yay for infinate probabilities!)
thus time has nothing to do with the big bang as other sentient beings must have measured time long before the big bang happened...
We do?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->inafact, space is infinatly vast (we think), then there must be other sentient life forms, infact there must be other sentient life forms that existed before us. (yay for infinate probabilities!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->No, there may be an infinite amount of emptiness outside the borders of the universe, but there's a finite amount of matter.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->thus time has nothing to do with the big bang as other sentient beings must have measured time long before the big bang happened...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->So what existed before them, and what existed before that? Etc.
There was no beginning to existance it's just here and we're in it. Time is as old as existance which is forever. Since there is no beginning or end to existance there is none for time. Time now is based on relative positions in it. Like we say it's the year 2005 .. but that's only from the birth of christ ( and cause it's easier to write than 10x10^infinity +1). So if you want to mark the beginning of time in our context it was the big bang.
there.
:-)
Philosophy > Physics/Mathematics <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First i felt the deep desire to look at you in a very angry way and snort at the same time <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> but i decided otherwise, so feel happy about not beeing snorted at <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
What do mathematics and philosophy have in common?
Both are cheating.
And what do they not have in common?
Mathematics itself tells you that it is cheating, but philosophy claims that it is founded on basic logic. (Oh the irony)
Edit: And just for fun: The existence started to exist with my first memory. (I just said, that you all are meaningless and i bet that ~50% of you wouldnt even notice witheout this little line)
To get this back onto the plane of reality, what some, most prominently Alien Cow, express in here is a 19th century concept of time as a static, unchangeable 'line' running from eternity to eternity. This concept died with the advent of the theory of relativity.
Einstein made it clear that time and space are connected, are "timespace"; two vectors on the same plane. The faster you move through space, the slower time progresses for you. Great masses can warp time as well as space.
Keep this in mind: Time and space are one.
Now realize this: The Big Bang marks not the expansion of a whole lot of matter compressed into tiny bit of space into the universe, but the creation of space <i>itself</i> in the first place. There was no space before the Big Bang. None. And conversely, there could be no time, nor any law of nature based on either, which just about demolishes every single one we know. The Big Bang was the beginning of this universe; not only of a big bubble of existence, but of <i>everything</i> we have so far perceived, including the concept of existence.
Whether there have been universes before the Big Bang does in so far not make much of a difference - they were culled, removed, when their spacetime disappeared; we have no way of determining their nature from our perspective.
So, time, as well as space, began with this universe. <i>How</i> it began, <i>why</i> it began, lies outside the reach of science or any other human faculty but faith.
*way out of my league*
Einstein made it clear that time and space are connected, are "timespace"; two vectors on the same plane. The faster you move through space, the slower time progresses for you. Great masses can warp time as well as space.
Keep this in mind: Time and space are one.
Now realize this: The Big Bang marks not the expansion of a whole lot of matter compressed into tiny bit of space into the universe, but the creation of space <i>itself</i> in the first place. There was no space before the Big Bang. None. And conversely, there could be no time, nor any law of nature based on either, which just about demolishes every single one we know. The Big Bang was the beginning of this universe; not only of a big bubble of existence, but of <i>everything</i> we have so far perceived, including the concept of existence.
Whether there have been universes before the Big Bang does in so far not make much of a difference - they were culled, removed, when their spacetime disappeared; we have no way of determining their nature from our perspective.
So, time, as well as space, began with this universe. <i>How</i> it began, <i>why</i> it began, lies outside the reach of science or any other human faculty but faith. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yay thanks Nem! That was what I was trying to say in the first place! Could we end in the solution that time started same exactly same moment as big bang, just because there was NOTHING before it! But then there is the question how and what big bang was if it wasn`t existing before explosion? I also concluded that the Expanding of the space actually is same as Time!
It comes back to "If a tree falls and no one hears it, does it make a sound?"
On the other hand, since time is a relative measurement, maybe it only started to exist when the first thing to measure it existed (note that inanimate objects count). In that case, it started to exist at the exact moment of the big bang.
But, what if there was something before the big bang? pre-matter, as some have pointed out in other threads about this.
Frankly, I think it's an insoluble problem until we somehow manage to know for certain how the universe started.
No, you're contradicting yourself.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->On the other hand, since time is a relative measurement, maybe it only started to exist when the first thing to measure it existed (note that inanimate objects count). In that case, it started to exist at the exact moment of the big bang.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's better; time is relative.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But, what if there was something before the big bang? pre-matter, as some have pointed out in other threads about this.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If time began at the big bang then <i>by definition</i> nothing happened before it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
Mine can!
This is true to a degree; a more accurate statement would proably be, you cannot percieve time without space; it's something we just can't get our head around.
How do you percieve a change in time; you look for movement.
How can you tell if something is moving; you look for a change in position over time.
etc.
etc.
So, back to the big bang. For an immeasurably short instant; nothing existed in the the three dimensions of space. Does that mean that time didn't exist? No, it just means at that immeasurably short moment, there was nothing to compare time against. Time itself still existed, there just wasn't the means to quantify it.
Hell, suppose time 'stopped' right now. given the spacial information available to you, you'd be unable to show that time ever existed.
At the immeasurably short instant of the big bang, time still existed, the three spacial dimensions did too for that matter. It's just that there was no way to verify their existance.
[EDIT] Addendum: Dimensions cannot be destroyed, they are infinite. Even if at a given moment a dimension is empty, the potential for it to not be empty still exists.
*Waves arm up* <i>Thousands of years ago...</i>
cyndane.. well i guess plenty of other people have addressed your idea of time... the question isnt about when the word came to be its about when the object of time came to be... the thing called time...
edit: ugh cyndane cmon... the question isnt about philosophy... who cares when things decided to start scheduling around time and when the word came to be... im pretty sure align beat the hell out of you and your philosophicalations... its just like saying something doesnt exist before the word is invented with meaning behind it... i cant really think of an example right now but suppose the first person who came up with a name for "fire" did fire not exist before the word? it obviously did.... bah... cant believe im editing my post after saying i was gonna drop it.. my conclusion is i hate you all <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
anyway.. ive just repeated most of the stuff said already and this threads getting pretty watered down..
my plan is to just forget about it since it doesnt make one bit of difference to me... for real.. no use at all.. just drop it..
Certain details lend credence to Einstein however...
And what if we argue that the universe itself, by the processes forming life, is intelligent and even self-consious?
But Cyn, you are restricting the definition of time to the regular measurement of change, which I agree didn't happen before intelligent life. However ime is, quite probably according to modern science, a dimension and property of space just as the three other spatial dimensions are (width, height, depth).
So by your view, you are also restricting these three properties as something available only to intelligent life, and thus you are colapsing space into an undimensioned blob.
I believe you confuse the measurement of a property with the actual property. Yes, we defined what an hour was, but that hour still took place before we measured it. It's much like saying the elephant had no size before intelligent life defined size. And with no size or physical span, it would collapse into a miniature black hole.
Now, if you argue that nothing exists before you see it, you are venturing into a completely different area of philosophy, but I don't see how you can assign existence to observation without restricting it to your own observations only.