One God

[Gordon]

I don't think you have understood what I have said about Time.    Time does not exist objectively except  in the human mind.  When we observe a sequence of events Time comes into existence....in our minds.

That there was a temporal 'gap' between two events would have been the case long before there were humans around to experience said 'gap'.

The universe can have a beginning and an end regardless of the nonexistence of Time.

If it has a beginning and an end there is an interval between these two positions, then 'time' applies.

The question arises what existed before the universe began.  This automatically leads to infinite regress.

I'd say it automatically leads to a 'don't know'

[Free Willy]

That there was a temporal 'gap' between two events would have been the case long before there were humans around to experience said 'gap'.

If it has a beginning and an end there is an interval between these two positions, then 'time' applies.

I'd say it automatically leads to a 'don't know'

I hate to say it Gordon but by saying that youre tacitly admitting that it could be a single entity that has no boundary but isn't an infinite chain of events.

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't think you have understood what I have said about Time.    Time does not exist objectively except  in the human mind.  When we observe a sequence of events Time comes into existence....in our minds.

The universe can have a beginning and an end regardless of the nonexistence of Time. The question arises what existed before the universe began.  This automatically leads to infinite regress.

Nope Sriram - you have completely lost me now. 'Beginning' and 'end', in this context, are terms that relate to time so if time does not exist, nor does 'beginning' or 'end'.

[ekim]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_time

[Gordon]

I hate to say it Gordon but by saying that youre tacitly admitting that it could be a single entity that has no boundary but isn't an infinite chain of events.

I didn't say or imply that at all: stop being silly.

I'm firmly on the side of 'don't know'.

[ProfessorDavey]

er, what am I supposed to be looking at?It's a given that Haydn's view on that is bound to be less bonkers than yours.

Details of the Research Excellence Framework (the REF), which is the mechanism by which all UK research in universities is assessed every 6 years or so. No reason why you'd have any knowledge of this but in academic circles it is a huge deal (a kind of research OFSTED).

Point was you were describing my work as 'nationally' important, so I thought I'd cheekily point out that the most recent REF determined that 'my' work (both my personal research and the wider departmental research) was 'internationally excellent' (termed 3* in REF) or 'world leading' (the top level 4* in REF). Or at least 99% of it was!

So just a bit of fun - but hey, you've learned something about how the quality of research in universities is assessed.

[ProfessorDavey]

It's a given that Haydn's view on that is bound to be less bonkers than yours.

Err, Haydn is a composer - he wrote the music. He didn't write the words, nor would he necessarily have believed them, although he was rather religious. The work was basically a commission from a guy called Johann Peter Salomon who actually asked Handel to write it first.

But were Haydn to have believed this then that would be understandable in the 1790s, well before we had the wealth of evidence about the universe, its nature, its origins and the evolution of life on earth that we do now. But to continue to consider this view to be preferable to that supported by the current evidence - well, that's a different matter.

[Free Willy]

I didn't say or imply that at all: stop being silly.

I'm firmly on the side of 'don't know'.

No.....You are firmly on the side of I don't know but I know it can't be that". A case of the having your cake and eating it fallacy.

[Free Willy]

Err, Haydn is a composer - he wrote the music. He didn't write the words, nor would he necessarily have believed them, although he was rather religious. The work was basically a commission from a guy called Johann Peter Salomon who actually asked Handel to write it first.

But were Haydn to have believed this then that would be understandable in the 1790s, well before we had the wealth of evidence about the universe, its nature, its origins and the evolution of life on earth that we do now. But to continue to consider this view to be preferable to that supported by the current evidence - well, that's a different matter.

I think we left it at you asserting that there were networks that somehow bucked contingency and necessity and not wanting to outline one and that is where, it see.s you are comfortable at remaining. I feel moved to quote a line from the Scots classic favourite song a Gordon for me... under the present circumstances that's "Nae use tae me."

[Free Willy]

Details of the Research Excellence Framework (the REF), which is the mechanism by which all UK research in universities is assessed every 6 years or so. No reason why you'd have any knowledge of this but in academic circles it is a huge deal (a kind of research OFSTED).

Point was you were describing my work as 'nationally' important, so I thought I'd cheekily point out that the most recent REF determined that 'my' work (both my personal research and the wider departmental research) was 'internationally excellent' (termed 3* in REF) or 'world leading' (the top level 4* in REF). Or at least 99% of it was!

So just a bit of fun - but hey, you've learned something about how the quality of research in universities is assessed.

Doesn't help since I know neither your establishment, nor your department, nor what it does, nor how good it feels.

[ProfessorDavey]

I think we left it at you asserting that there were networks that somehow bucked contingency and necessity and not wanting to outline one and that is where, it see.s you are comfortable at remaining. I feel moved to quote a line from the Scots classic favourite song a Gordon for me... under the present circumstances that's "Nae use tae me."

Nope - stop misconstruing what I said.

I never said that there were networks that bucked contingency and necessity. I said that networks provided a plausible alternative to rebut your rather naive assertion that there must be contingency and necessity where something isn't contingent. The clearly plausible example of a network where every component is simultaneously contingent and necessary clearly rebuts your narrow presumption and unevidenced assertion.

[Sriram]

That there was a temporal 'gap' between two events would have been the case long before there were humans around to experience said 'gap'.

If it has a beginning and an end there is an interval between these two positions, then 'time' applies.

I'd say it automatically leads to a 'don't know'

Why? Why should there be any Time? Changes just happen in the material world. Time is just a concept in the human mind, a human construct,  to position these changes in a sequence.

Time comes into existence within the human mind when it observes changes. We imagine that Time is something that goes on forever on and on, regardless of changes happening in the universe. We cannot think of any change without the idea of Time....I agree.

But that does not mean that there is anything like Time in reality in an objective sense.  It is just a concept created by the human mind. Just a way in which we understand and deal with reality.

[ProfessorDavey]

Doesn't help since I know neither your establishment, nor your department, nor what it does, nor how good it feels.

Well I'm not going to reveal those kinds of details, as you would imagine that would potentially de-anonymise me. So you'll just have to accept what I tell you to be true - or not as you wish. It is true, by the way.

So 99% of our research was either 'internationally excellent' (termed 3* in REF) or 'world leading' (the top level 4* in REF). Overall our department was ranked 7th in the UK (out of 89 universities that submitted to our area of research). In terms of research publications (arguably the most important aspect of academic research) we were 2nd, behind only Imperial.

You can choose to believe this, or not, but it would be really weird to just make this up if it weren't true.

[Sriram]

Nope Sriram - you have completely lost me now. 'Beginning' and 'end', in this context, are terms that relate to time so if time does not exist, nor does 'beginning' or 'end'.

Why should any beginning and end mean that Time exists? Changes just happen in the material world.....that is all. When we observe these changes, the idea of a sequence of events automatically arises in our mind which leads to the concept of Time. Time is not out there....it is in the mind.

[ProfessorDavey]

Why should any beginning and end mean that Time exists? Changes just happen in the material world.....that is all. When we observe these changes, the idea of a sequence of events automatically arises in our mind which leads to the concept of Time. Time is not out there....it is in the mind.

Because 'beginning' and 'end' are terms we use to describe time. Unless you are describing this in spatial terms, but that seems to make no sense.

So if there is no time, then describing something as the beginning or the end seems totally inappropriate.

[Free Willy]

Well I'm not going to reveal those kinds of details, as you would imagine that would potentially de-anonymise me.

That's wise............Have I shown you my Oscars?

[ProfessorDavey]

That's wise............

I'm glad you agree.

Have I shown you my Oscars?

No, because I very much doubt you have any.

[Free Willy]

I'm glad you agree.
No, because I very much doubt you have any.

Careful now.

[Gordon]

No.....You are firmly on the side of I don't know but I know it can't be that". A case of the having your cake and eating it fallacy.

Nope - I haven't said 'it can't be that', though I may have said 'I can't see good reasons to take 'that' seriously (especially where 'that' is either fallacious, incoherent or is so amorphous that it is meaningless).

[ProfessorDavey]

Careful now.

No disrespect Vlad. Just that in all the years on these MBs I don't think you've ever mentioned working in the film industry, so seems surprising that suddenly out of the blue you'd reveal not only your profession but also a bunch of oscars.

[Gonnagle]

Nope - I haven't said 'it can't be that', though I may have said 'I can't see good reasons to take 'that' seriously (especially where 'that' is either fallacious, incoherent or is so amorphous that it is meaningless).

Dear Gordon,

Amorphous

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zN5LdQvZHXc


Gonnagle.

[Free Willy]

Nope - I haven't said 'it can't be that', though I may have said 'I can't see good reasons to take 'that' seriously (especially where 'that' is either fallacious, incoherent or is so amorphous that it is meaningless).

I extend the same invitation to you as I do to others. State what the argument from contingency and the KCA are and refute them showing your working out...

[Sriram]

Because 'beginning' and 'end' are terms we use to describe time. Unless you are describing this in spatial terms, but that seems to make no sense.

So if there is no time, then describing something as the beginning or the end seems totally inappropriate.

Beginning and end are events. They have noting to do with the existence of Time in an absolute sense. Even if Time did not exist these events would still occur.

It is a different matter that we humans are used to thinking of events in terms of space and time.....

[Gordon]

I extend the same invitation to you as I do to others. State what the argument from contingency and the KCA are and refute them showing your working out...

The KCA we've done to death yonks ago (it involves the fallacy of begging the question), and the contingency argument is being advanced by you, so you go ahead and set out the premises if you feel so inclined.

[ProfessorDavey]

Beginning and end are events. They have noting to do with the existence of Time in an absolute sense. Even if Time did not exist these events would still occur.

It is a different matter that we humans are used to thinking of events in terms of space and time.....

But an event is something that takes place within the context of time - no time, no event.