RE: Kalam argument under attack
February 9, 2015 at 5:34 pm
(This post was last modified: February 9, 2015 at 5:40 pm by Alex K.)
It's spelled Kalam "argument", with "s. 
Yeah, you're not alone. I'm speculating here, but I suppose it could look like it shrinks slower and slower going backwards in time such that it never goes to zero size. The question "why did the universe wait infinite time to spew us out *now*" is tempting and confusing, but migh be a tautology. Still, even extremely unlikely quantum fluctuations would occur in such an infinite timeline, which would lead to deviations. Very confusing and counterintuitive.
(February 9, 2015 at 4:42 pm)Exian Wrote: Alex, you've already answered the question I had about observed expansion and infinity, but my brain is stubborn. Even if we go further back with the trillion degree soup, doesn't infinity pose a problem for anything eventually happening/changing, singularity or not? I just can't visualize infinity in any other way.
Yeah, you're not alone. I'm speculating here, but I suppose it could look like it shrinks slower and slower going backwards in time such that it never goes to zero size. The question "why did the universe wait infinite time to spew us out *now*" is tempting and confusing, but migh be a tautology. Still, even extremely unlikely quantum fluctuations would occur in such an infinite timeline, which would lead to deviations. Very confusing and counterintuitive.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
