(September 15, 2021 at 2:26 am)Deesse23 Wrote:(September 14, 2021 at 11:46 am)Klorophyll Wrote: For any existing universe, the two propositions, P :"A universe began to exist" and Q :"A universe has an eternal past" are mutually exclusive, one of them must be true, Q is simply non-P. This is the basic law of excluded middle.What if there was a theory/hypothesis where (looking back in time, from todays point of view) there is a point at which time (and space) break down? Doesnt our universe "start to exist"?
Unless you're willing to deny the most basic rules of logic and delve into sophistry, you are forced to pick one of these propositions.
What if, at some point, time (and the universe) start together? Didnt the universe exist for all of time? Since eternal means "for all of time", isnt the universe eternal?
That is, why your methodology, WLC-like, of arguing with (intuitive) assumptions about the fundamentals of reality, which we know to be not-intuitive, and then applying logic to those, is doomed to lead you to wrong conclusions. You better go with observation and evidence, and those currently are telling us (as has been told again and again): "We dont know".
Aa Polymath already pointed out, when, at quantum level, everything becomes a wave function, a "distribution of probability" influenced by the fact if you are observing or not, then collapsing into what we perceive as our subjective reality, well, then exercises in logic like the above are turning into being "not evern wrong".
I am of the mindset that the utopia of "Unified Theory" will never be that. I think ultimately everything is a crap shoot. I think atoms popping into and out of existence is a math that can never be perfect, because reality will never be.