Argument for a Beginningless Existence

[Mudhammam]

I don't wish to stamp all over discussion, but it's my opinion that applying standard thinking techniques is going to fail hard when we approach the extremes of the universe. All of science has come up against a hard barrier, and trying to waltz through it with a pipe in your mouth is definitely fun, but in the end it's just speculation. By all means go ahead, but I'm just noting that I don't see anything real that can possibly be gained through such discussion.
Reality is complicated, and if we don't have something we can get our grubby mits on, we have no way of knowing if we've run a marathon in the right or wrong direction.

I don't disagree, but when it comes to concepts or definitions that are so basic, such as "being" or "not-being," "is" or "is not," "motion" or "rest," "change" or "persist," etc., it seems to me reasonable to ask what these mean in relation to the totality of being, refining our ideas as the material world is further apprehended, of course (Ironically, as far as science has come from the ancient Greeks, the questions they asked are the ones physicists, mathematicians, cognitive scientists, etc. continue to debate).