[meteorite-list] Paradox; we need to understand "time"

From: Graham Christensen <majorvoltage_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 09:54:01 2004
Message-ID: <F203Y05EPRV3J7lqmte0001c5f0_at_hotmail.com>

Wow, that's totally true. You are knowledgeable in theoretical physics. Keep
up the good work :)

************************************************************
Graham Christensen
majorvoltage_at_hotmail.com
http://www.geocities.com/aerolitehunter

>From: "M Yousef" <diamondmeteor_at_hotmail.com>
>To: BOORX4_at_aol.com, meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Paradox; we need to understand "time"
>Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 08:22:20 +0000
>
>
>
>Dear Bob;
>First, there is a mistake in your question: Nobody says the universe was
>created from "nothing". There is nothing called "nothing". "Nothing" is
>what
>is not; i.e. what does not exist. Non-existance can never be turned into
>existance.
>
>What is correct is: The universe was created from a singularity; like a
>black hole; a condense matter in almost zero volume (space) and at almost
>zero time. Then this matter in this singularity blasted off in what is
>known
>as the big bang and it started expanding (and still). This expanding
>universe has in the future three options: 1- keeps expanding for ever (open
>universe), 2- conracts again at some point (closed universe), or 3- stops
>and stay static (flat universe). If it chooses 2 (depending on its mass
>density) it will return to the singularity again and maybe another big bang
>again and so on (pulsating universe).
>
>In either case, one may ask: what was there before this singularity? We can
>turn this question religious if you like, but if you dont prefer we can
>turn
>it into metaphysics, because our laws of physics and mathematics CAN NOT be
>applied for singularities. This question has been asked before to many
>religion leaders; What was God doing before He created the universe? And
>the
>answer usualy is: "God created the universe AND time, and not: the universe
>in time".
>
>Away from religion, this question was the subject of intensive debate
>between Aristotle and Plato and their schools:
>
>Plato considers time to be created with the world, while Aristotle believes
>that the world was created in time, which is an infinite and continuous
>extension.
>Plato says:
> "Time, then, and the heaven came into being at the same instant in order
>that, having been created together, if ever there was to be a dissolution
>of
>them, they might be dissolved together. It was framed after the pattern of
>the eternal nature, that it might resemble this as far as was possible; for
>the pattern exists from eternity, and the created heaven has been, and is,
>and will be, in all time."
>
>Aristotle believes that Plato’s proposition requires a point in time that
>is
>the beginning of time and there is no time before it. This is inconceivable
>for Aristotle who adopts Democritus notion of uncreated time and says:
> "But so far as time is concerned we see that all with one exception are
>in agreement in saying that it is uncreated: in fact, it is just this that
>enables Democritus to show that all things cannot have had a becoming: for
>time, he says, is uncreated. Plato alone asserts the creation of time,
>saying that it had a becoming together with the universe, the universe
>according to him having had a becoming."
>
>Time for Aristotle is a continuum and it is always associated with motion,
>and as such, it can’t have a beginning. He says that time is the "number of
>movement in respect of the before and after, and is continuous.... In
>respect of size there is no minimum; for every line is divided ad
>infinitum.
>Hence it is so with time."
>
>Plato on the other hand cosiders time as the circular motion of the
>heavens,
>while Aristotle said it is not motion but the measure of motion and he says
>that it is like a circle , a structure that has no beginning or end and so
>is endless in both directions. Since everything in the world is finite,
>also
>time has to be finite and since it is continuous it has to be a circle
>because we cannot conceive of a first time; for any first time we could
>conceive of a time before that., so time has to be circular.
>Arsitotle says: "Now since time cannot exist and is unthinkable apart from
>the moment, and the moment a kind of middle-point, uniting as it does in
>itself both a beginning and an end, a beginning of future time and an end
>of
>past time, it follows that there must always be time: for the extremity of
>the last period of time that we take must be found in some moment, since
>time contains no point of contact for us except the moment. Therefore,
>since
>the moment is both a beginning and an end, there must always be time on
>both
>sides of it. But if this is true of time, it is evident that it must also
>be
>true of motion, time being a kind of affection of motion."
>
>WE CONCLUDE HERE that time for Aristotle is circular and the world was
>created somewhere along this circle while for Plato time is continuous and
>was created with the world. Both views have unsolvable drawbacks.
>
>Ibn Arabi (1165 A.D.) shares the idea of a circular endless time with
>Aristotle and that it is a measure of motion, but he does not consider it
>as
>continuum. On the other hand Ibn Arabi agrees with Plato that time is
>created with the world and refuses Aristotle’s proposal that the world is
>created in time. In fact Plato was right when he considered time to be
>created, but Aristotle refused this because he could not conceive of a
>starting point to the world nor to time. Only after the theory of general
>relativity in 1915 that introduced the idea of ‘curved time’ that we could
>envisage a finite but curved time that has a beginning. By this we could
>combine between Plato’s and Aristotle’s opposing views. However, Ibn Arabi
>did that seven centuries before, and he also explicity spoke about curved
>and relative time (ask for references if you want).
>Ibn Arabi also extends the concept of time into the abstarct world (i.e.
>not
>material) and he says that the soul that comprehends time has two forces
>one
>is practical by which it senses material objects and their motion (change
>in
>state or place) [this is physical time], and the other is theoretical by
>which it gain knowledge (change in status)[this is abstarct time]. Physical
>time is associated with motion in space and it existed with the material
>world while abstarct time is associated with the changes of states of
>knowledge (of the divine spirits (=waves) who are going to create the
>world), and beyond all that there is God in TimeLessNess existance.
>
>Summery:
>As far as the material world is concerned, and that is what we mean by the
>universe, this universe was created from a singularity MORE than 15 billion
>years ago AS MEASURED NOW from our position in the space-time coordinates.
>15 billion years, that is the distance to the most distant objects detected
>from earth, but not to the singularity itself. Although those most distant
>objects (radio galaxies and Quazars) appear to be close to the beginning of
>the universe, but this does not mean that the singularity is 16 or 17 or
>whatever close number to 15 billion years away. This is because the
>space-time is NOT FLAT which means that time in particular does not measure
>equally in all its points, especially when we approach the singularity. In
>other words, if we move back in time and with the speed of light towards
>this singularity we will never reach it, and what appears to us here few
>seconds it will be there billions of years. This is because of the
>curvature
>of time.
>
>
>
>Cheers
>Mohamed
>==================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>From: BOORX4_at_aol.com
>>To: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>Subject: [meteorite-list] Paradox
>>Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 18:46:43 EST
>>
>>Hi List Members,
>>
>> Correct me if I'm wrong. The Astronomy community theorize that the
>>universe was created in a millisecond, a flash, the big-bang. From
>>nothing
>>to everything, instantaneously.
>> We all accept the theory that matter cannot be created or destroyed.
>>So how can this be?????
>>Inquiring minds would like to know.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Bob
>>
>>______________________________________________
>>Meteorite-list mailing list
>>Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>>http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
>
>
>Sincerely
>
>Mohamed H. Yousef
>----------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
>
>
>______________________________________________
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
Received on Tue 05 Feb 2002 03:38:44 AM PST