• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A new theory for the creation of the universe.

Curious George

Veteran Member
"People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.” Einstien

Using everyday, common meaning of the words, it says that those who believe in physics know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion. I suppose one can read into that statement most anything they want it to say.

Still no answer that I have seen to the questions,

"micro seconds, seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, light years" What is required to be in place before those can be measured? IF, there is no intelligence to measure it, is it really there and if so, how can you prove it? Can you provide a link(s) that explains about "time" when it is not in the context of measuring it or explaining how to measure it?
If you are looking for data, I am not going to be able to help you. I can tell you that logically, if an event happened time must have existed at least at that moment. That is not science. That is logic. If you are going against logic then I cannot help you. If you want to preserve your theory then you can make your entity subject to a different time than our universe is subject and that will work. Then you can have events A,B,C etc happening before event D the creation of our relative time and to us events A-D would be instantaneous even though there was an order. Doesn't mean that there might not be other problems with your theory but it will sort out the temporal issue. It is logically impossible for an event to happen without time. The best you can do is equivocate time, into two separate times.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
"People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.” Einstien

Using everyday, common meaning of the words, it says that those who believe in physics know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion. I suppose one can read into that statement most anything they want it to say.

What Einstein said was completely correct.

For example, if you see something as being in your past, it is quite possible that someone else moving past you at half the speed of light sees it as being in your future. The distinction between past, present, and future is an illusion based on our reference frame. That does NOT mean that time is an illusion.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
What Einstein said was completely correct.

For example, if you see something as being in your past, it is quite possible that someone else moving past you at half the speed of light sees it as being in your future. The distinction between past, present, and future is an illusion based on our reference frame. That does NOT mean that time is an illusion.
it does mean that time is an illusion, but illusion does not mean non-existent.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
it does mean that time is an illusion, but illusion does not mean non-existent.

Well, for example, proper time along a path in spacetime is a perfectly non-illusory, and in fact, non-relativistic quantity. It is independent of all observers and can be calculated by the same formula for all observers using their own reference frame time and space coordinates.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Well, for example, proper time along a path in spacetime is a perfectly non-illusory, and in fact, non-relativistic quantity. It is independent of all observers and can be calculated by the same formula for all observers using their own reference frame time and space coordinates.
And every drop of in a drawn optical illusion can be accounted, but that doesn't mean the picture is not an illusion. And that the picture is an illusion does not mean it does not exist.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
And every drop of in a drawn optical illusion can be accounted, but that doesn't mean the picture is not an illusion. And that the picture is an illusion does not mean it does not exist.

Well, if you take time intervals as 'illusory' because they are measured to be different in different coordinate systems, then you equally need to consider energy as illusory, for example.

This is sort of like saying that the y-component of a vector is illusory because the coordinate system can be chosen and we get different answers in different systems.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Well, if you take time intervals as 'illusory' because they are measured to be different in different coordinate systems, then you equally need to consider energy as illusory, for example.

This is sort of like saying that the y-component of a vector is illusory because the coordinate system can be chosen and we get different answers in different systems.
Illusion is a term dealing with perception, if it may be percieved wrongly, it is an illusion. If time is relative to one's frame of reference and one cannot see but their frame of reference they can percieve time as absolute from their frame of reference. This is "wrongly." That was a point of relativity. Hence, the quote is saying time is an illusion. Prior to that point it was percieved wrongly according to einstein
 
Last edited:

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Science starts in the present with a desired ending.

The Bible starts in the past with a desired ending, and that happy ending is connected to the creation account that mankind will once again have the healthy healing benefits of the Genesis Tree of Life according to Revelation 22:2.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
...................... And that the picture is an illusion does not mean it does not exist.

The ^above^ words reminds me that many say the beautiful paradisical picture of the Garden of Eden is just an illusion, but that ' illusion', so to speak, does exist in Scripture. And since present-day earth's troubles are also described in Scripture and do exist, then to me there is No reason to doubt earth's coming beautiful paradisical conditions will also come into existence.
 

Ted Evans

Active Member
Premium Member
The best you can do is equivocate time, into two separate times.

Can you answer the following questions? No one else seems to have an answer, at least a logical, verifiable one.

"micro seconds, seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, light years" What is required to be in place before those can be measured? IF, there is no intelligence to measure it, is it really there and if so, how can you prove it? Can you provide a link(s) that explains about "time" when it is not in the context of measuring it or explaining how to measure it?

“I recently went to the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder,” says Lloyd. (NIST is the government lab that houses the atomic clock that standardizes time for the nation.) “I said something like, ‘Your clocks measure time very accurately.’ They told me, ‘Our clocks do not measure time.’ I thought, Wow, that’s very humble of these guys. But they said, ‘No, time is defined to be what our clocks measure.’"

So, what if there are no clocks, can you prove there is time?
 

Ted Evans

Active Member
Premium Member
The Bible starts in the past with a desired ending, and that happy ending is connected to the creation account that mankind will once again have the healthy healing benefits of the Genesis Tree of Life according to Revelation 22:2.

I agree with that. The Bible is history written in advance.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
"Once upon a time, long, long ago, there lived a magical King...."
See any similarity? You're basing a whole mythology on a folk tale.
So Earth, land, sea and vegetation were created before the Sun and stars?
Only science explains, and an explanation not yet complete is not a support for magic.
How does this agree with science? it's not even framed as a scientific concept.
Don't all mythical creators use magical powers and strength to effect their aims?

I have never read anywhere in Genesis stating ' once upon a time.......' So, No similarity for me.
According to Genesis, first the Sun and stars, then Earth/land/sea vegetation, etc.
Where does it say that Earth was created before Sun and stars ???

Doesn't science teach the universe did Not come from nothing?
Isaiah 40:26 agrees that the universe did Not come from nothing.
God's ' power and strength ' is Not Nothing. God's power and strength is His abundant dynamic energy.
God's powerfully strong energy started the creation of the universe.
Perhaps kind of like a Power Grid supplying needed powerful energy.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
“I recently went to the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder,” says Lloyd. (NIST is the government lab that houses the atomic clock that standardizes time for the nation.) “I said something like, ‘Your clocks measure time very accurately.’ They told me, ‘Our clocks do not measure time.’ I thought, Wow, that’s very humble of these guys. But they said, ‘No, time is defined to be what our clocks measure.’"
So, what if there are no clocks, can you prove there is time?

I find the ^ above ^ to be very interesting, and glad you shared that with us.
I am wondering if you have an thoughts regarding the words of Psalms 74:16-17 and Genesis 8:22 in connection to time on Earth.
I do know that for each number we can count we can count both forwards and backwards endlessly, forever, so could that counting be used in connection to the counting of time.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Actually, that is incorrect.

What if God created the universe 10,000 years ago in the state you find it today. Than all of your assumptions get thrown in the trash can. You can't assume the age of the Earth or the universe based on the calculations you're using because you have assumed the universe wasn't created 10,000 years ago in the state we find it in today.
Which would mean God put stars' light-waves in mid-travel to Earth that specifically make the world look much older due to the time that light would take to reach the Earth from moment zero leaving the star. Why would He do this? The only reason would be to obscure His own mechanism of creation. And then He would have had to command/inspire the writer's of The Bible to write up an account that flies in the face of the observable facts. This is deception, plain and simple.
 

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
Which would mean God put stars' light-waves in mid-travel to Earth that specifically make the world look much older due to the time that light would take to reach the Earth from moment zero leaving the star. Why would He do this? The only reason would be to obscure His own mechanism of creation. And then He would have had to command/inspire the writer's of The Bible to write up an account that flies in the face of the observable facts. This is deception, plain and simple.

And you know enough to judge the Almighty God. You must know everything. Wow!
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Can you answer the following questions? No one else seems to have an answer, at least a logical, verifiable one.

"micro seconds, seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, light years" What is required to be in place before those can be measured? IF, there is no intelligence to measure it, is it really there and if so, how can you prove it? Can you provide a link(s) that explains about "time" when it is not in the context of measuring it or explaining how to measure it?

“I recently went to the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder,” says Lloyd. (NIST is the government lab that houses the atomic clock that standardizes time for the nation.) “I said something like, ‘Your clocks measure time very accurately.’ They told me, ‘Our clocks do not measure time.’ I thought, Wow, that’s very humble of these guys. But they said, ‘No, time is defined to be what our clocks measure.’"

So, what if there are no clocks, can you prove there is time?
Clocks can be anything. So are you asking if nothing but space existed could we prove time existed logically? The answer is no. If you are asking if given the existence of space, something else and change could we prove time logically then the answer is yes. Is it verifiable? Verifiable doesn't speak to proof, it speaks to reliability of something we cannot prove. If it is reliable we assume it is true, but that does not mean that it is analytically proven.
Ted Evans said:
...micro seconds, seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, light years" What is required to be in place before those can be measured?"
Intelligence. For intelligence measures. But the units are arbitrary.

But it does not follow that intelligence need be in place before time can exist.

It can be proven to be necessary because of how we define it. If you want to change how we define time we are no longer discussing the same thing. You are at that point equivocating.

If I say all weebles are wobbles
And all wobbles eat before sleeping.
This entails that all weebles eat before sleeping.

All weebles eat before sleeping.
Weebles existed and slept before any intelligence to define weebles as wobbles.
Weebles ate before any intelligence to define weebles as wobbles.

It is due to the definition of time that we can prove time to exist in hypotheticals.
If you want to void this then you have to void logic. If you would like to void logic you need to replace it with a better system of logic or you are just representing solipsism. If this is the case, then there can be no discussion.

Axioms are rules for systems. You cannot ignore an axiom and then try to later argue based on that axiom. The result is incoherence.

Time as we understand it can always be viewed as a measurement because it describes a relationship. It is a word that we have arbitrarily given to describe a relationship. Whether that relationship exists in some noumenal reality is not provable without axioms regarding the noumenal reality. But if you ignore axioms to create a place where logic doesn't exist, you cannot then invoke logic to prove a place like such exists.
 

Ted Evans

Active Member
Premium Member
Clocks can be anything. So are you asking if nothing but space existed could we prove time existed logically?

That is not what I am asking. My question is what would the units of time be based on without the sun and earth's rotation?

The answer is no. If you are asking if given the existence of space, something else and change could we prove time logically then the answer is yes.

No, that is not what I asked.

Is it verifiable? Verifiable doesn't speak to proof, it speaks to reliability of something we cannot prove. If it is reliable we assume it is true, but that does not mean that it is analytically proven.

I believe my question was, without intelligence to measure time, how could time be proven to exist?
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
That is not what I am asking. My question is what would the units of time be based on without the sun and earth's rotation?
The easiest answer that would be siezed, if it were available, would be the distance travelled by a photon. But literally any change would work.
No, that is not what I asked.



I believe my question was, without intelligence to measure time, how could time be proven to exist?

How could anything be proven without intelligence to prove it?

Consequently, I am assuming that we are talking about intelligence outside of a system void of intelligence proving time inside that system void of intelligence. And that I have explained. Are you talking about something different?
 
Top