Originally posted by 753
Yes, but at the level of individual universes, would first causes still exist or be required?
Why would there need to be? If the universe budded off another universe, and each universe has its own independent time, then there is no need for a first cause. The first cause, in this cause, would be something that happened in another universe, and would not be a first cause at all.
Originally posted by 753
Wel, Obama's identity as Obama lies within the way his atoms are organized, sure. But in the case of the Universe, I think the debate would become semantycal. We would have to find another term for the pre-universe that developed into the universe because of its differences, but the idea that reality always existed in some way or another would remain.
The pre-universe lacked things like "atoms" and "fundamental forces" it was beyond just being organized differently.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonThis simply shifts the problem of a first cause or of a perpetual existence across different universes. Either there was a first universe (and a first cause) or an infinite sequence of universes has always existed.
Why would there need to be? If the universe budded off another universe, and each universe has its own independent time, then there is no need for a first cause. The first cause, in this cause, would be something that happened in another universe, and would not be a first cause at all.
Originally posted by 753
This simply shifts the problem of a first cause or of a perpetual existence across different universes. Either there was a first universe (and a first cause) or an infinite sequence of universes has always existed.
There is no first universe, and I will show you why. Time seems to move forward, and that is because entropy increases over time. In another universe this might also be true, but there is nothing that will make the direction of time the same in different universes. For example; Lets say a baby universe (lets name it Bob universe) buds off our universe right now. If time in this new universe (Bob) was traveling in the opposite direction, relative to our universe, then 13 billion years ago, Bob universe would have been 13 billion years old. If our universe were to bud off that universe (Bob), then there would be no first cause.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There is no first universe, and I will show you why. Time seems to move forward, and that is because entropy increases over time. In another universe this might also be true, but there is nothing that will make the direction of time the same in different universes. For example; Lets say a baby universe (lets name it Bob universe) buds off our universe right now. If time in this new universe (Bob) was traveling in the opposite direction, relative to our universe, then 13 billion years ago, Bob universe would have been 13 billion years old. If our universe were to bud off that universe (Bob), then there would be no first cause.
Now, here's the kicker, do we have any reason to think this is true besides it fulfilling your philosophical position?
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Now, here's the kicker, do we have any reason to think this is true besides it fulfilling your philosophical position?
It was just an example of how no first cause could happen. The multiverse is unknown territory. I simply wanted 753 to be open to the possibility of no first cause. The chances of my scenario taking place in the multverse is remote, but cannot be ruled out.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonYes, but then 'reality was always there' (since time is a never ending circle) which was the alternative I cited to a first cause. My whole point was that our understanding of the big bang did nothing to solve the problem of whether or not reality has always been or if it had a beggining point.
There is no first universe, and I will show you why. Time seems to move forward, and that is because entropy increases over time. In another universe this might also be true, but there is nothing that will make the direction of time the same in different universes. For example; Lets say a baby universe (lets name it Bob universe) buds off our universe right now. If time in this new universe (Bob) was traveling in the opposite direction, relative to our universe, then 13 billion years ago, Bob universe would have been 13 billion years old. If our universe were to bud off that universe (Bob), then there would be no first cause.
I don't think the reason time 'seems' to move forward is because entropy increases though.
I simply don't see any causal connection whatsoever between the passage of time and the increase of entropy. Time is not going to stop once there is no more free energy and entropy peaks and stabilizes, this makes no sense. Time does not flow backwards in places where local entropy is decreased either.
Global entropy always increases. Time flows forward. Anyone oberving the flow of time will see entropy increasing.
If time could be reversed - and nothing indicates it can - the entropy that increased while time flowed forward would decrease.
It's not because entropy increases that time flows forward or even seems to flow forward to us.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But the symmetry of time is broken. The reason is because entropy always rises in one direction of time, and decreases in the other.
yes, but your experience of time moving in a singualrly forward direction is a byproduct of your brain.
Either in terms of how long it takes to process information in the first place, or because of the way our brain produces stories and narratives of events
Originally posted by inimalist
yes, but your experience of time moving in a singualrly forward direction is a byproduct of your brain.Either in terms of how long it takes to process information in the first place, or because of the way our brain produces stories and narratives of events
But that was not what I was referring too. I was talking about the symmetry of time in the multiverse.