For Argument Sake Lets Assume That God Does Not Exist So How Was Time Created (v, attractive)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I’ve always wondered if God Doesn’t exist Then how was time created. For example: Let’s say that I was able to build a Time machine like the one in the HG Wells movie. I’m sitting in the time machine and decide to push the lever forward back in time to infinity. If thats possible, how would I ever be able to get back to the present. So how was time created. Any physicists Out there able to give any theories on how time was created without the existence of God.
Last edited by TheGoodTheBadTheUgly; 08-24-2019 at 08:59 AM..
I like how Mr. Greene explains these very interesting concepts here:
I also like how Mr. Einstein sortof encapsulated the concepts in that (paraphrasing) 'the distinction between past, present, & future is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.'
I’ve always wondered if God Doesn’t exist Then how was time created. For example: Let’s say that I was able to build a Time machine like the one in the HG Wells movie. I’m sitting in the time machine and decide to push the lever forward back in time to infinity. If thats possible, how would I ever be able to get back to the present. So how was time created. Any physicists Out there able to give any theories on how time was created without the existence of God.
Sortof begs the question then how is distance & velocity created?
Nonsensical questions.
Time is merely the duration of events, or intervals between them.
Distance is the length in space between two points.
They're measurements of a dimension, so technically we created them by our perceptions of the reality we observe. There's a very elegant symmetry in special relativity that shows length is not constant across all frames of reference, and similarly time is not constant across all frames. Thus by perception we determine coincidences of length and observed events that other referential frames may disagree with.
This empirically demonstrates that they're dimensions we perceive, length is non-specific it can refer to any two points on a space time membrane transcribing the shortest curve (a straight line being one specific class of curve) of the membrane between those points. Time is considered differently in general, but need not be if we consider that the universe is at least four dimensions, thus time may be considered just an additional axis in a typical 3 diimensional coordinate system. No different to any other dimension.
It naturally occurs. Humans took a step further and define time to manage other humans. We just refined it and the powerful use it to gauge performance.
I think the real question OP is asking is how did anything come to be (mass, etc.) if there was no God to create it. This is sometimes used as eveidence of the existence of God. I've never found that to be a compelling argument becuase you could always then ask, where did God come from? There is the Big Bang Theory, of course, but even that presupposes that something was put in motion for that to occur, if that is indeed how the universe was created. I simply think we lack the understanding at this point to know, and I'm OK with that. MAybe we will figure it out someday and maybe not; I doubt we will during my lifetime.
I’ve always wondered if God Doesn’t exist Then how was time created. For example: Let’s say that I was able to build a Time machine like the one in the HG Wells movie. I’m sitting in the time machine and decide to push the lever forward back in time to infinity. If thats possible, how would I ever be able to get back to the present. So how was time created. Any physicists Out there able to give any theories on how time was created without the existence of God.
GodDidIt is no more a meaningful answer that ZeusDidIt or LeprechaunsDidIt.
You are presenting this binary choice:
*Someone must be able to explain how 'time was created' (the idea of that time was created is in itself a questionable supposition), or else
*God created time
That there is a one-or-the-other choice between those two is, simply, an illogical proposition.
Tell you what. Let's use that time machine for something else. Let us go back 1000 years, to England or China, to the Amazon or the Great Plains of North America, to the Zagew dynasty of Ethiopia. Present them with a similar question: demand to know, absent God [or substitute whatever deity/deities were locally recognized], what makes the sun shine. Or what causes diseases. Or how birds fly. They will, of course, be unable to offer an answer of any coherence. Do you therefore think that God makes the sun shine, causes diseases, and keeps birds aloft? Of course not.
If you think the concession 'I don't know' thereby confirms that the responsible agent for whatever is unknown must be some deity - and, of course, the deity you happen to favor - then you are sorely mistaken.
I think the real question OP is asking is how did anything come to be (mass, etc.) if there was no God to create it. This is sometimes used as eveidence of the existence of God. I've never found that to be a compelling argument becuase you could always then ask, where did God come from? There is the Big Bang Theory, of course, but even that presupposes that something was put in motion for that to occur, if that is indeed how the universe was created. I simply think we lack the understanding at this point to know, and I'm OK with that. MAybe we will figure it out someday and maybe not; I doubt we will during my lifetime.
The "first cause" argument is a conundrum, but ascribing the first cause to a god that is outside the universe is special pleading. You could just as well ascribe the first cause to "the universe" and it would be no more or less explanatory than the god explanation, except that the universe explanation is more parsimonious and consistent with previous inductive steps.
The god explanation is attractive because it's anthropomorphic and because it's useful for religious apologetics.
I think the real question OP is asking is how did anything come to be (mass, etc.) if there was no God to create it. This is sometimes used as eveidence of the existence of God. I've never found that to be a compelling argument becuase you could always then ask, where did God come from? There is the Big Bang Theory, of course, but even that presupposes that something was put in motion for that to occur, if that is indeed how the universe was created. I simply think we lack the understanding at this point to know, and I'm OK with that. MAybe we will figure it out someday and maybe not; I doubt we will during my lifetime.
Is the question the same if some form of time-space has always existed? In that case there is no causality; it just exists as an axiomatic fact. What gets created is a form of space-time where creatures can evolve to ask why they exist, but that can just be the result of a random variation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
