Do you believe in god?

[appolose]

Sqrl said:

appolose said:

 

 

 

1:

Fair enough, I will only add that the way the vast majority of virtual particles pay for themsleves is by anihilating themselves with a partnering anti-particle.  So in the vast majority of cases this quantum foam is adhereing to the 1st law and behaving itself. Its these special cases that muck things up and jam their foot in this door.

5:

I believe you have the jist of what I was saying, its hard to be absolutely sure unless you paraphrase it a bit, but it seems like you've got it. 

I still have a have problem with an infinitely or finitely looping universe, though, as they both run up a gainst my first or second points.

6:

For this section I was focusing on the scenarios in which the past was good and truly infinite, not mistaken for infinite, just infinite.

The first part about having even one infinite spacial dimension is essentially saying that with infinite locations you naturally get an infinite number of events every second.  In a way this is infinite history, but this is distinguishable (in my view) from an infinite past.

In the second paragraph I'm focusing on the pre-modern universe, and by pre-modern I mean pre-inflation.  With the dimensions smooshed down imperceptibly small.  I know that there isn't much known about this period and even time is somewhat of a question mark here. I want to go over time real quick before I come back to this though, just to make sure.

Time is just another dimension, like space, that we are traveling through. The result of this is that we see effects like time dialation which is perhaps more commonly known because of the "Twin Paradox" where one twin is stuck on earth while another travels the stars and when the traveling twin returns he finds his earthbound twin is much older than he is.  This is because your velocity is actually constant, any increase in spatial velocity decreases your velocity through time.  As a result this effect is only applicable to things with mass, hence photons and gravitons (light and gravity particles respectively, both with zero mass(note the graviton hasn't been emprically confirmed, the photon has)) are uneffected by time and all of their velocity is spatial.

So knowing that, what is time without mass?  This question is similar to "If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it fall does it make a noise?" only there are direct mathematical implications of their being nobody around in this case.  As I said above in this scenario I'm honestly not sure what the rate of time would be but several likely possible answers appear to me to produce infinite rates of time.  If the rate of time is infinite anything that could happen, would happen, no matter how improbable, because even infinitely unlikely events will happen when given an infinite amount of time to occur.  Only completely impossible events won't occur.

Clearly this scenario has no gaurantee of being what truly happened, but the idea that there is a scenario where the universe could spring up from nothing, not as a random event, but as an avoidable consequence of the situation is intriguing to me to say the absolute least.

So, in effect, you're saying that there wasn't any measurable time (or that it was infinitely fast) due to the lack of matter, yes?  In that event, I think another discussion would follow (started by me) on how the universe could show up in any consistent sense (in the definition of time).  Also, I would consider the study of time (otherwise, your word (which, again, I do not take lightly)) to be far too unfounded to be used in a science debate.  But in that event, I think my own redundancy and confusion would be going nowhere, so we may just have to leave this point at this stage.