A little while back I tried my hand at a bit of philosophy, just for fun. The following is what I ended up with. It resembles the cosmological argument slightly, and it is by no means complete, I just wanted to share it.
The case for the eternal:
It is impossible, I find, to logically consider the existence and nature of the universe without realizing that there must be an eternal realm which lies outside the universe. This argument is best presented by looking at the nature of time. Time delineates both a beginning and an end for the universe, and so we measure the current age of the universe by time, and for all of our purposes the two are inextricably tied together.
So time demonstrates a definitive length, during which the universe exists, and the conditions within the universe demonstrate that all things are only the product of other things. The point is two-fold; first, the universe could not have simply started to exist with nothing prior to it. This idea would set the universe outside of time, at a point where it both always and never existed. Since the universe will end it cannot always exist, and since it is, it cannot never exist. Also, since the universe is tied to, and bound in, time, it cannot exist outside of it. The second part of this point is that anything of finite length, as determined by time, had a beginning, which is to say a force prior to it which, in acting in some way, caused the beginning. Following this logic, there must be a force in an infinite state (else beginnings are removed ad infinitum); that is that which resides in the eternal realm.
The question at this point is in regards to the nature of the eternal, and not its existence. We must realize, primarily, that the eternal realm must have laws that do not match our own, and that the exact nature of these laws cannot be stipulated by us given the fact that our knowledge is limited to the observable and measurable (and finite) universe. Though, assuming a physical force within the eternal there are laws that may be inferred, as shall be discussed.
The Nature of the Eternal:
The establishment of the idea of an eternal realm leads us to ask what the eternal is.
--The Universe--
Starting most locally we look at the idea of the universe itself being eternal, a view which would necessitate a looping life-span given the fact of a beginning and end to the universe (we have already established the universe cannot be eternal in the sense that is strictly sprang up, being as that would set the universe outside of time). The looping model would present a universe that acts much like the stars within it, shrinking down and exploding out again, forming new stars. There are several apparent problems with this model. Looking at the later stages of a star, it absorbs material into itself, undergoes rapid nuclear fusion (releasing a great amount of energy), then explodes and only about 1/1000 of the solar mass worth of material is expelled; this material interacts with other material to form the new star. The problems with modeling the universe after this cycle to explain it as the eternal factor are clear: much of the process requires interaction with forces outside of itself (it cannot be eternal and alone), and also it releases a much smaller amount of material, which would make any loop a decaying loop, which in turns assigns age.
--Time--
If we look at time itself as the eternal, then we would have to see the universe as a simple number on a number line, stretching to infinity in either direction. Yet, supposing this, we must also suppose that the point at which the universe exists could be any point, all points, and no points. This argument would the be seen as having been already established as false. Furthermore, time is a measurable constant, it affects but does not (as far as we have seen) produce. For time to be the eternal it would have to exist as a force and not a measure, and being a universal constant, time could not exist independent of itself (the eternal force needing to be outside of time).
--Physical Force--
The eternal realm can also be looked at as being made up of a physical force, the laws and state of which we cannot know for sure, being limited to our own universe. This idea makes the most sense of any so far since, in the physical world, something cannot spontaneously come out of nothing. However, for this to be true there would have to be, existing in the eternal, a useable yet un-diminishable physical force capable of generating [randomly generating] highly ordered systems, or universes, such as our own (which contains us, beings capable of thought, that would have been generated by a force incapable of intelligence).
The problem with this system comes upon the fact that such a system would likely have laws similar to our own, being as we are a product of, and subordinate to, this force. While it is true that we could not stipulate these laws with certainty, we can infer that our laws and the laws in this realm would be close, and if this were the case, then an useable but un-diminishable force would be nearly impossible. Following this line of thought we see that a physical eternal force, while not altogether impossible, is highly improbable. [[For a more in-depth look at an idea of a physical eternal force, see Stephen Hawking's book The Grand Design. Though keep in mind that M-theory is not proven, and poses the need for grand meta-laws that would enable many of the actions of M-theory to take place. The problem is that the meta-laws are unexplained and must simply be accepted as a given. Needless to say it is only one of the stances that physicists take.]]
--The Spiritual--
The final possibility for the eternal realm is that the force residing there lies both outside the temporal and physical realms. A force with such characteristics would follow the stipulation that it cannot be known at all by simply observing the known physical universe, and could also therefore be outside the limitations of the finite. This realm can be looked at as the Spiritual, and the force that resides within it is God, an unknowable (by scientific standards) and unfathomable being/existence.
So yeah. Probably quite a bit to still work on in that. But it was fun to write.
Questions or comments?
The case for the eternal:
It is impossible, I find, to logically consider the existence and nature of the universe without realizing that there must be an eternal realm which lies outside the universe. This argument is best presented by looking at the nature of time. Time delineates both a beginning and an end for the universe, and so we measure the current age of the universe by time, and for all of our purposes the two are inextricably tied together.
So time demonstrates a definitive length, during which the universe exists, and the conditions within the universe demonstrate that all things are only the product of other things. The point is two-fold; first, the universe could not have simply started to exist with nothing prior to it. This idea would set the universe outside of time, at a point where it both always and never existed. Since the universe will end it cannot always exist, and since it is, it cannot never exist. Also, since the universe is tied to, and bound in, time, it cannot exist outside of it. The second part of this point is that anything of finite length, as determined by time, had a beginning, which is to say a force prior to it which, in acting in some way, caused the beginning. Following this logic, there must be a force in an infinite state (else beginnings are removed ad infinitum); that is that which resides in the eternal realm.
The question at this point is in regards to the nature of the eternal, and not its existence. We must realize, primarily, that the eternal realm must have laws that do not match our own, and that the exact nature of these laws cannot be stipulated by us given the fact that our knowledge is limited to the observable and measurable (and finite) universe. Though, assuming a physical force within the eternal there are laws that may be inferred, as shall be discussed.
The Nature of the Eternal:
The establishment of the idea of an eternal realm leads us to ask what the eternal is.
--The Universe--
Starting most locally we look at the idea of the universe itself being eternal, a view which would necessitate a looping life-span given the fact of a beginning and end to the universe (we have already established the universe cannot be eternal in the sense that is strictly sprang up, being as that would set the universe outside of time). The looping model would present a universe that acts much like the stars within it, shrinking down and exploding out again, forming new stars. There are several apparent problems with this model. Looking at the later stages of a star, it absorbs material into itself, undergoes rapid nuclear fusion (releasing a great amount of energy), then explodes and only about 1/1000 of the solar mass worth of material is expelled; this material interacts with other material to form the new star. The problems with modeling the universe after this cycle to explain it as the eternal factor are clear: much of the process requires interaction with forces outside of itself (it cannot be eternal and alone), and also it releases a much smaller amount of material, which would make any loop a decaying loop, which in turns assigns age.
--Time--
If we look at time itself as the eternal, then we would have to see the universe as a simple number on a number line, stretching to infinity in either direction. Yet, supposing this, we must also suppose that the point at which the universe exists could be any point, all points, and no points. This argument would the be seen as having been already established as false. Furthermore, time is a measurable constant, it affects but does not (as far as we have seen) produce. For time to be the eternal it would have to exist as a force and not a measure, and being a universal constant, time could not exist independent of itself (the eternal force needing to be outside of time).
--Physical Force--
The eternal realm can also be looked at as being made up of a physical force, the laws and state of which we cannot know for sure, being limited to our own universe. This idea makes the most sense of any so far since, in the physical world, something cannot spontaneously come out of nothing. However, for this to be true there would have to be, existing in the eternal, a useable yet un-diminishable physical force capable of generating [randomly generating] highly ordered systems, or universes, such as our own (which contains us, beings capable of thought, that would have been generated by a force incapable of intelligence).
The problem with this system comes upon the fact that such a system would likely have laws similar to our own, being as we are a product of, and subordinate to, this force. While it is true that we could not stipulate these laws with certainty, we can infer that our laws and the laws in this realm would be close, and if this were the case, then an useable but un-diminishable force would be nearly impossible. Following this line of thought we see that a physical eternal force, while not altogether impossible, is highly improbable. [[For a more in-depth look at an idea of a physical eternal force, see Stephen Hawking's book The Grand Design. Though keep in mind that M-theory is not proven, and poses the need for grand meta-laws that would enable many of the actions of M-theory to take place. The problem is that the meta-laws are unexplained and must simply be accepted as a given. Needless to say it is only one of the stances that physicists take.]]
--The Spiritual--
The final possibility for the eternal realm is that the force residing there lies both outside the temporal and physical realms. A force with such characteristics would follow the stipulation that it cannot be known at all by simply observing the known physical universe, and could also therefore be outside the limitations of the finite. This realm can be looked at as the Spiritual, and the force that resides within it is God, an unknowable (by scientific standards) and unfathomable being/existence.
So yeah. Probably quite a bit to still work on in that. But it was fun to write.
Questions or comments?
No comments:
Post a Comment