Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (51400)	6/2/1999 9:55:00 PM
From: Bob Lao-Tse	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Thinking more on this: The notion that eternity and infinity must exist in some form, that either the universe itself or that which is outside of the universe must eventually turn out to be infinite in both time and space, is a form of infinite regression. (Or maybe I should say infinite progression). As I understand it, infinite regression is the logical paradox that we can never move in space because whenever we try, we first have to arrive at a point where we are halfway to our destination, then halfway from the halfway point, and so on. Since we are always halfway between where we used to be and where we're headed, we can never actually get to where we're headed. Of course, those who believe this to be true need only walk towards a large brick wall in order to demonstrate the flaw in this reasoning. So infinite regression makes some kind of loosely defined sense logically, but doesn't have anything to do with reality as we experience it. Could the same be true of this infinitely progressive proof of some form of infinity/eternity? Food for thought. -BLT

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (51400)	6/3/1999 11:59:00 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

<<So infinite regression makes some kind of loosely defined sense logically, but doesn't have anything to do with reality as we experience it. Could the same be true of this infinitely progressive proof of some form of infinity/eternity?>> Well yeah, if you go on this idea, you explain away what is before your eyes. Some people actually use this to support the claim that the physical world is but an illusion. Fascinating concept. Seen Matrix or thirteenth floor yet? Great movies if you like to compulse on this idea. I think the life experience is very real. But obviously the life of the tree in the front yard is limited. It has a definite beginning, goes through changes and ends. In other words it is temporary. The universe as we experience it is full of temporality. This bolsters our question again that it must have sprung from something, and be a temporary manifestation itself. Was it a tiny stiring of cosmic soup or a great "let it be" comment from an eternal authority. Stiring of cosmic soup might explain the initiation of life but there still had to be space and a diversity of matter hanging around which, with given circumsanses, ends up being viable protoplasm. So, the question of the first protoplasm is nothing to me since it could have been organized by cosmic accident or intentional stiring by an eternal omni being. What remains of interest is, what is beyond beginnings and endings.