Friday, May 12, 2006

The origin of time?

So, Scott Adams asked an interesting question, and while it's not really a new question and has been asked before, it is THE question of all questions.

I’m fascinated by people’s opinions of the “start” of the universe.

The most popular theory is that God came first and created everything. But that leaves hanging the question of how God got here. If God was always here, then time has no beginning. And if time has no beginning, then God is unnecessary because the rest of the universe could have just as easily always been here. I know someone will leave a comment with babble about God being “beyond time” or something similarly incomprehensible. That won’t help.

The Big Bang isn’t an answer because something had to cause it. And something had to cause the cause, etc. That never answers the question of what came first.

My best guess is that time is a closed loop, and we are destined to exactly repeat our existence to infinity. I’m sure some physicist has come up with the same theory.
Truly, how could anything exist? The words you read on a blog on the internet have no business existing at all. What came first? - the question of all questions.

Shallow thinking people, of course, do the GOD thing. That's the lazy way to think about it, as they simply make up some sort of creator that fits in with human thinking perfectly as the only explanation you really need. Duh..

I'm kinda with Adams here. Everything exists because it always has and always will. We're here perceiving it because we always have and always will.

Ask yourself what your existence was like the first 13 billion years of the universe? Did you exist? Did you mind that you didn't exist and weren't having thoughts and such? Is that same void what it's going to be like when you die?

I think that all time and space exists all the time. Therefore, you are never really in a void. It would have to be an amazing coincidence that your frame of reference has suddenly come into existence at this point in time. I think in reality, your frame of reference always exists, and you are never in the void.

In other words, I've written these exact same words an infinite number of times, and will do so infinitely. The next word out of the keyboard has no randomness to it.. no free will.. and I have no choice in changing what it is destined to be.

I've seen studies done on the brain that have determined that free will is an illusion. There is a "subconscious" part of the brain that makes decisions, and the conscious part simply rationalizes the decision as if it were our choice. It's really not. There is no free will. There can be no free will because that could alter the next word I'm going to type, and that can't happen in a closed loop system of time.

So, I think there's a really good chance that when you die, your frame of reference will simply shift back to your first awareness.. zing.. you're born..

So what's the consequence of that if I'm right? Well, you better start having a really good fucking time, and enjoy things.. and do the things you want to do for yourself and so on.. because you're going to do it over and over and over..

But then.. if you subscribe to that philosophy and make changes based on it to improve your life, then you've already done that an infinite number of times, so you really have no choice but to do it.. Or not.. the choice isn't yours..

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm freaking out, man. =)

I love the paradox of this question. But, I don't know how the closed-loop idea solves the question. In accepting the closed-loop theory, you are accepting the idea that everything exists "because it does". I don't see how that is any different than a linear point of view suggesting that everything exists "because it does". Either way, you are saying that matter/life/energy/everything has always existed, it's really just a different view on what happens with it.

I obviously never took a philosophy class, but I do like thinking about these kinds of things. =)

Also, I don't think I agree with you on not having free will either. I do agree that we subconsiously come to a decision before activating rational thought, but I just think that means we decide emotionally instead of rationally. But, we can overcome that and rationally think about subjects and overcome our "gut impulse" with effort, IMO.

That's a lot of thinking for a Friday afternoon...

Anonymous said...

Personally, I think you've been watching way too much Star Trek little brother........lol. Your wasting too much thinking about something you have no control over, so live life to the fullest and leave the space time continuem to the aliens.

LJ