Time cannot be created

[ChunkMonk]

But calling it a system with attributes implies that it is composed of something, so I’m asking what?

 

[STT]

Yes, in that the universe was not formed out of any pre-existing substance.

Great. Then there was a point that you only have God. Is that correct? If yes, then you have another point which you have God and the universe. We can then agree that the second point comes after the first point.
You need time to allows this happen. Where is the problem in this argument?

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

Yes, in that the universe was not formed out of any pre-existing substance.

Great. Then there was a point that you only have God. Is that correct? If yes, then you have another point which you have God and the universe. We can then agree that the second point comes after the first point.
You need time to allows this happen. Where is the problem in this argument?

That there was never a point when only God existed. There never was an S, using your scenario’s terms.

(Edit: Originally wrote “there was ever a point” in error, which led to a misunderstanding below)

 

[STT]

But calling it a system with attributes implies that it is composed of something, so I’m asking what?

Your system (what you have in your mind) could have a set of attributes or not (when there is nothing).

 

[STT]

That there was ever a point when only God existed. There never was an S, using your scenario’s terms.

I am just defining S as nothing. Adding nothing to any thing doesn’t change anything.

By now you agree that there was a point when only God existed. Do God and the universe coexist after the act of creation?

 

[anna]

Alright people TIME for a break,calm down :hugs: , take a deep breath continue, but watch blood pressure.God Bless

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

That there was ever a point when only God existed. There never was an S, using your scenario’s terms.

I am just defining S as nothing. Adding nothing to any thing doesn’t change anything.

By now you agree that there was a point when only God existed.

No, I don’t.

Sixteen character limit breaker.

 

[SMHW]

You can’t add nothing to something. The operation is not defined for “nothing”. Nothing (lack of definition) and zero are not the same.

 

[STT]

No, I don’t.

Sixteen character limit breaker.

You said “there was ever a point when only God existed”. Why did you use “was”? What is the “point”?

 

[RandomAlias]

@STT, you have defined creation as depending on time, so of course the time at which time was created is an inconsistent concept.

The solution is to look for a time-independent definition of creation. I would suggest envisioning the existence of time as a subset of the existence of all things. Other things may exist which are not associated with time. The existence of time may be contingent on the existence of other things. Maybe even the existence of all things is contingent on something greater, like existence itself; some philosophers say that is what God is, existence itself.

 

[STT]

You can’t add nothing to something. The operation is not defined for “nothing”. Nothing (lack of definition) and zero are not the same.

Of course I can define nothing and define an operation for it. Nothing is defined as lack of anything and satisfy this equation: nothing+something=something in a set which has two elements {nothing, something}.

 

[STT]

@STT, you have defined creation as depending on time, so of course the time at which time was created is an inconsistent concept.

The solution is to look for a time-independent definition of creation. I would suggest envisioning the existence of time as a subset of the existence of all things. Other things may exist which are not associated with time. The existence of time may be contingent on the existence of other things. Maybe even the existence of all things is contingent on something greater, like existence itself; some philosophers say that is what God is, existence itself.

Of course any act has two states one comes after another. So no act is possible without time. Time is therefore a fundamental thing in the reality. This I have discuss it in another reply to the necessity of time when you have change:

We have a change in a system therefore we have two states related to change which are different. These two states cannot be at the same point since the state of system becomes ill-defined. Therefore these two states should be placed on different points. There is also a directionality in change because one state (first state) comes before another state (second state), this is another property of change. Up to here we realize that we need to a variable with at least two points which the first point comes before the second point. There should however be a duration between these two points otherwise the second state will never take place. This variable is therefore time.

 

[Wesrock]

LOL (at myself)

Sorry, typo. Never, not ever.

“there was never a point when only God existed”

 

[SMHW]

You are presupposing the states of "creation does not exist’ and ‘creation does exist’. Those are both time states. But I don’t think they are meaningful even if that is the kind of language you see in Genesis.

I think it is more useful if we look at God as the “Source” and creation as the “effect”. Time becomes the measure of the effects of the acceptance or rejection of this relationship rather than a measure of existence versus non-existence.

 

[RandomAlias]

Of course any act has two states one comes after another. So no act is possible without time. Time is therefore a fundamental thing in the reality. This I have discuss it in another reply to the necessity of time when you have change: …

You have not proven that time is fundamental. You have assumed it.

 

[anna]

Good night everybody…get some rest continue tomorrow. It’s been an interesting thread. : God Bless:

 

[Gorgias]

S however follow by S’ meaning that we need a variable to take care of this change. This variable is nothing but time. This means that we can write dS/dt=A(S) where A is act of creation.

Invalid formula. The classical (Aristotelian) definition of ‘time’ is “the measure of the change” of physical objects. In other words, without any physical objects (or system), there is no such thing as time. (Which gives rise to the old joke: “What did God do before creation?” “Nothing – he didn’t have time!” )

Anyway, your equation uses a variable (T) in reference to a state (S) in which the system did not exist. Essentially, you’re attempting to measure dS/d(NULL), which does not work.

Time comes into existence when S’ comes into existence. It cannot be used to measure anything before it, itself, exists!

 

[Vico]

We know that the act of creation is defined as a change in state of existence, S → S’ where S is state of existence when there is nothing and S’ is the state of existence when the universe exists. S however follow by S’ meaning that we need a variable to take care of this change. This variable is nothing but time. This means that we can write dS/dt=A(S) where A is act of creation. The problem with this equation is that S’ contains time since act of creation creates time too. This is a contradiction since you need time to explain the act of creation while time is an emergent variable of act of creation.

Creation does not take place from within an already existing creation, so no, there is no time before it. Read Mc Taggart “The Argument for the Unreality of Time” 1908, and “The Nature of Existence”, 1927, especially regarding the C-series in The Nature of Existence. There he gives rational to explain why an illusion of change and temporal succession can arise when reality is truly without time.

 

[STT]

LOL (at myself)

Sorry, typo. Never, not ever.

“there was never a point when only God existed”

So, God and the universe has always coexisted? How do you define creation?

 

[STT]

You have not proven that time is fundamental. You have assumed it.

I have shown that time is fundamental thing in reality. Please read my comment to another poster in the following. This argument is valid when you have change or there is an act.

We have a change in a system therefore we have two states related to change which are different. These two states cannot be at the same point since the state of system becomes ill-defined. Therefore these two states should be placed on different points. There is also a directionality in change because one state (first state) comes before another state (second state), this is another property of change. Up to here we realize that we need to a variable with at least two points which the first point comes before the second point. There should however be a duration between these two points otherwise the second state will never take place. This variable is therefore time.