Why an Eternal Circle of Time Cosomology Cannot Exist

[JimBowie1958]

The fallacy of infinite regression has been known since ancient times, and was probably one of the key reasons that the faiths based on the God of Abraham displaced almost all polytheistic faiths in the world with the exception of China, Japan, India and a few others.

Today there is a new solution of sorts to the difficulty of describing time in the context of an infinite past vrs a finite past. This idea is that of an eternal circle of time that has always existed and always will exist. I feel fairly sure that some ancient philosopher has already suggested this idea and it lost the competition of thought millennia ago, but it is back as the cosmology of choice among atheists because the eternal steady state theory has been proven false.

I think it probable that the ancients rejected the eternal circle for valid reasons, but I can only guess what they may be since I can find no detailed description of this idea, other than a few discussions on the internet. So I invite any discussion on this in case I have misconstrued anything or overlooked plausible alternatives.

First, for the Eternal circle of time to be valid, it must be the same precise string of events of time. This is because each iteration of the circle has to be the SAME EXACT iteration or else the whole concept collapses into another version of "kick the can down the road" non-answer to the infinite regression fallacy. The circle has to relive itself EXACTLY. Not an exactly similar iteration, but the SAME EXACT ITERATION. In each cycle if a guy named 'Bill Robertson "Showboat" Flanigan' was born in one cycle, the SAME Bill must be born of the same parents in every cycle. Now there is still only one Bill that was born and lived and died, because when time folds back on itself it simply re-enters the time flow that had occurred before, and that avoids the infinite regression problem.

Next, our universe is causal in nature. A causes B, which causes C. In every iteration or repeat of any segment of time, it must eventually 'double back' in exactly the same way, with the same causes. Because we are not simply recreating the past events, we are repeating the exact same segment of time.

The problems arise when we look at how causality works in the universe. We do not live in a deterministic universe. It has been proven that if one could somehow know the entirety of causes on an event that one can determine how that event will unfold. This is because at the basic building-block atomic level of our material quantum mechanical existence it has been proven that some things are unpredictable. The position of elections and thus the exact shape of molecules is chaotic and unpredictable. This makes any fluid behavior also chaotic and unpredictable except in a statistical way which is all that QM theory attempts to achieve in the form of electron valence shells of probability. The Chaos Theory also states that though there may be predictable overall patterns to chaotic systems, they are unpredictable in their individual particular events.

What this boils down to is this; If one could turn back the clock to 1900 and let it resume from there, the unfolding events will not be exactly the same. In a battle where the blood flow in a generals heart caused him a lethal heart attack, the next execution of events might cause him to live through it or avoid it altogether. A beautiful flower growing in some vacant lot that inspires an artist might not make it for that artist to ever see. A chaotic universe is not only unpredictable, but if driven by causality, it is also NOT exactly repeatable.

Thus this whole model of a universe that folds back on itself to exactly relive the same periods of time cannot be a universe ruled by causality. Perhaps in some magical fantasy story such a thing can be, but in our universe as we know it, there is ever reason to believe that an eternal circle of time is incompatible with the chaotic yet still causal nature of the universe in which we live.

To put it in a syllogism:
1. If the universe exists in a circle of time, then it must repeat itself exactly with each cycle.
2. The universe as we know it is not repeatable due to its chaotic nature.
3. Therefore our universe cannot exist in an eternal circle of time.

 

[G.T.]

You did not do a good job of proving number two. All you have is conjecture. It doesnt matter if its chaotic thus improbable of repeat. Because the event isnt happening over and over, its just once on the same time line which is looping. It is not a new event occuring the same, it is the same event (not that i even ascribe to that theory, just pointing out that your argument is not solid by any means).

 

[BreezeWood]

that is correct, it is the same event cycle reoccurring not reoccurring events.

First, for the Eternal circle of time to be valid, it must be the same precise string of events of time. This is because each iteration of the circle has to be the SAME EXACT iteration or else the whole concept collapses ...

not at all, that would be time standing still - finite.


in fact, change is what is necessary for there to be Time.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Time only exists up to the speed of light. Beyond 186,000 mi/sec, time stops. Doesn't that break the "cycle of eternal time"? God is on eternal time. Unless we can move faster that the speed of light, our time is finite.
Beyond 186,000 you can be: I was, I am, I will be, at the same time. You can throw a football down field and catch the pass at the same time. Folding and reliving would only work if you are in dimensions that never vary.
Sound waves vary. Light is constant, And light is a particle and a wave. How do you make them conform to the past to produce the same now or future, especially when photons interact with each other in a conscious way?

 

[JimBowie1958]

You did not do a good job of proving number two. All you have is conjecture. It doesnt matter if its chaotic thus improbable of repeat. Because the event isnt happening over and over, its just once on the same time line which is looping. It is not a new event occuring the same, it is the same event (not that i even ascribe to that theory, just pointing out that your argument is not solid by any means).

I understand that the SAME event is occurring with each cycle, but for the eternal circle to work without DIFFERENT events in each cycle that are close or similar to each other the universe must be determinant.

For example, if we split this huge chronological cycle into a gazillion little epochs, and in our epoch, we have events A, B, C, and D causing a set of events G-H-J then events A, B, C, and D must ALWAYS produce exactly the same effect set G-H-J, aka determinable with known all causes. If the circle does not exactly relive the exact same period of time in exactly the same way, the causes A, B, C, and D would produce at least a variance of effect set G'-H'-J'. This does not happen if the same period of time happens again in every cycle at our epoch of time.

The universe must also be causal, in other words the way A-B-C-D causes event set G-H-J must hold true to the same laws in each epoch. G-H-J happen each cycle because causes A, B, C, and D occur each time and determine the effect set G-H-J. If they do not, then the cycle is not reliving the exact same cycle each time, but only a variant of it.

Now I agree the universe is causal, but I am fairly certain it is not determinable. The QM model of the universe is known to be indeterminable at the atomic level, and since all effects are at least in part built on the behavior of atomic particles, the macro-level of events and causes can also not be exactly determinable.

Now one could say that the flow of time is so defined that the same exact things happen each time no matter what the cause and effects may be, but then that would violate the concept of our universe being built on causal events and only causal events.

And so the eternal circle of time that is both causal and determined seems to be implausible if not impossible.

 

[JimBowie1958]

that is correct, it is the same event cycle reoccurring not reoccurring events.

First, for the Eternal circle of time to be valid, it must be the same precise string of events of time. This is because each iteration of the circle has to be the SAME EXACT iteration or else the whole concept collapses ...

not at all, that would be time standing still - finite.


in fact, change is what is necessary for there to be Time.

You can have change in an eternal circle of time, as I understand it, but it would still repeat after a huge amount of time has passed. Much like a skipping vinyl album, the same song portion change in tone and words and notes, but keeps repeating itself. So you would have change within a perfectly repeated event time line.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Time only exists up to the speed of light. Beyond 186,000 mi/sec, time stops. Doesn't that break the "cycle of eternal time"?

No, it doesn't, as I understand it. If a thing were able to go passed the speed of light and did do so somehow, it would happen in every cycle of the circle.

God is on eternal time. Unless we can move faster that the speed of light, our time is finite.
Beyond 186,000 you can be: I was, I am, I will be, at the same time. You can throw a football down field and catch the pass at the same time. Folding and reliving would only work if you are in dimensions that never vary.
Sound waves vary. Light is constant, And light is a particle and a wave. How do you make them conform to the past to produce the same now or future, especially when photons interact with each other in a conscious way?

You seem to be asserting axioms. I do not think that is a useful way to discuss a subject.

 

[G.T.]

Jim what you dont understand we're saying is that the same event isnt "repeating," its still only happened ONCE ON THE TIMELINE, but you can revisit it. Its not an exact "repeat," its the event itself.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Except I am asserting Einstein, and if light speeds up or slows, we will have to do away with the theory of relativity, the law that says an electron charge can't change, and the second law of thermodynamics! Could it be that the structure of atoms emitting quasar light is actually significantly different to the structure of atoms in humans?

Einstein gave the world an epiphany that as a thing approaches the speed of light, it gets shorter and denser and time gets slower. But the speed of light remains constant. By the time you reach the speed of light, time stops. At that point you could go anywhere in the universe forward or backward in time and never age. That means that photons and for that matter, all forms of electromagnetic radiation never age. That makes them timeless. And light needs no ether to travel. Sound does. Even the process of folding over would disturb the sound wave medium and make the cycle change, which would have a domino effect on the next cycle. You could never go back to go.

There is another explanation shared by some astrophysicists.
John Gribbin, Cambridge, summed it up nicely:
"An electromagnetic wave is everywhere along it's path, everywhere in the universe at once. Distance does not exist for an electromagnetic wave. Everything in the universe is connected to everything else, by a web of electromagnetic radiation that 'sees' everything at once." How do you revisit it? It is already past present and future all at once.
Photons also consist of unlimited energy (omnipresent)

The other problem with folding over is the acknowledgement that photons appear to be able to process information and act accordingly. You would have to force light to adhere to prior decisions. It may not. ( omnipotent.)

Was the light from that quasar from this cycle or the last, or 15 cycles ago, and how would you know if you have no data to determine when we flopped last?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Jim what you dont understand we're saying is that the same event isnt "repeating," its still only happened ONCE ON THE TIMELINE, but you can revisit it. Its not an exact "repeat," its the event itself.

YES, I DO GET IT, lol..

YOU are not grasping what I am saying if you think I believe that the ternal circle idea has repeated iterations that are similar to itself. I have repeated that the timeline comes back to itself in each epoch, and 'relives' it exactly the same events. Not similar but the same.

I don't want to waste any more time trying to get you to actually read what I wrote in its entirety.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Except I am asserting Einstein, and if light speeds up or slows, we will have to do away with the theory of relativity, the law that says an electron charge can't change, and the second law of thermodynamics! Could it be that the structure of atoms emitting quasar light is actually significantly different to the structure of atoms in humans?

Einstein gave the world an epiphany that as a thing approaches the speed of light, it gets shorter and denser and time gets slower. But the speed of light remains constant. By the time you reach the speed of light, time stops. At that point you could go anywhere in the universe forward or backward in time and never age. That means that photons and for that matter, all forms of electromagnetic radiation never age. That makes them timeless. And light needs no ether to travel. Sound does. Even the process of folding over would disturb the sound wave medium and make the cycle change, which would have a domino effect on the next cycle. You could never go back to go.

There is another explanation shared by some astrophysicists.
John Gribbin, Cambridge, summed it up nicely:
"An electromagnetic wave is everywhere along it's path, everywhere in the universe at once. Distance does not exist for an electromagnetic wave. Everything in the universe is connected to everything else, by a web of electromagnetic radiation that 'sees' everything at once." How do you revisit it? It is already past present and future all at once.
Photons also consist of unlimited energy (omnipresent)

The other problem with folding over is the acknowledgement that photons appear to be able to process information and act accordingly. You would have to force light to adhere to prior decisions. It may not. ( omnipotent.)

Was the light from that quasar from this cycle or the last, or 15 cycles ago, and how would you know if you have no data to determine when we flopped last?

Don't see how the speed of light has anything to do with an eternal circle of time.

You really do not grasp the time scale involved.

 

[G.T.]

Then im sorry jim your syllogism in post number one makes no sense to me whatsoever.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Don't see how the speed of light has anything to do with an eternal circle of time.

Light changes time. It's spacial. If it speeds up or slows down, does everything else in the circle speed up (less time) or slow down (more time)? Does the circle elongate in real time at a higher speed? Has everything stayed static enough for you to revisit and recognize the past? An eternal circle can become the eternal oval of time, stretching the past, or the bigger, slower circle of time, where the past would pile up.

Run around a track as fast as you can. Then walk around the track. Then revisit the last turn on the track. What/which past are you revisiting? Use a roller coaster as an example, same speed, same track. You can revisit any spot on the trip over and over. Because it remains static.
Now the Daytona 500. Round and round and round they go. You can't revisit lap 2 or lap 8 because the race/car speed changed enough that revisiting any other past lap isn't possible. The track is constant. but that is all that is constant. Lap 1 is nothing like lap 10. An eternal circle of rollercoaster, yes. The eternal circle of time, no.

 

[BreezeWood]

To put it in a syllogism:
1. If the universe exists in a circle of time, then it must repeat itself exactly with each cycle.
2. The universe as we know it is not repeatable due to its chaotic nature.
3. Therefore our universe cannot exist in an eternal circle of time.

If the universe exists in a circle of time, ...

the time of each cycle is finite but "Not" necessarily the same (amount of time) for each cycle - however that same time continues from one cycle to the next eternally.

1 - is inaccurate, why would it have to repeat itself exactly ... its recurrence is dictated by momentum, expansion - contraction, nothing to do with exactness.


3 - the cycles are timed, it is the infinite recurrence of cycles that is is timeless ....


the Bang cycle at a certain point transforms from contraction to expansion and renews a new cycle ... at that point, from one to the other - there is a "complete moment of inaction" - no change, without change time stops during that moment and begins over again with the beginning of the new cycle.

from Bang 1 to Bang 2 there is for those two cycles their own time periods within a time frame inclusive of all cycles ....


perhaps not everything is included in the time frame of never-ending cycles as opposed to the timing of each cycle.

 

[The Irish Ram]

To put it in a syllogism:
1. If the universe exists in a circle of time, then it must repeat itself exactly with each cycle.
2. The universe as we know it is not repeatable due to its chaotic nature.
3. Therefore our universe cannot exist in an eternal circle of time.

1. Time cannot replicate itself exactly because the rate of time fluctuates dramatically caused by external interference., therefore it cannot remain universally circular.

2. Cosmos means order, and the universe conforms to the physics that we have adopted as scientific law. In fact it is where our knowledge of physics originates. Time wasn't even acknowledged as one of the 4 dimensions we have uncovered until Einstein (1905!) watched time through a telescope, instead of his pocket watch. The torture of his existence was the discovery that time was not dependable (static).

3. Correct. A circle of time would not be able to sustain it's exact orbit, due to the nature of time, and would fray and even snap slowing down and catching up to achieve the orbit of its last run.

 

[Derideo_Te]

JB: "Today there is a new solution of sorts to the difficulty of describing time in the context of an infinite past vrs a finite past. This idea is that of an eternal circle of time that has always existed and always will exist."

Not sure I am grasping the problem of describing time as being infinite past and present. The universe is infinite therefore the space/time continuum is infinite. What is the difficulty with that concept?

 

[The Irish Ram]

Except we know better.
The idea was debunked when Einstein was introduced to an expanding universe.
Some big bang the beginning, some let there be light, but few believe the universe didn't have a beginning.

How old is the universe? If you come up with a number it's because you have counted backwards to the beginning.

"Together with Roger Penrose, I developed a new set of mathematical techniques, for dealing with this and similar problems. We showed that if General Relativity was correct, any reasonable model of the universe must start with a singularity. This would mean that science could predict that the universe must have had a beginning, but that it could not predict how the universe should begin: for that one would have to appeal to God." Stephen W. Hawking "Origin of the Universe"

 

[JimBowie1958]

JB: "Today there is a new solution of sorts to the difficulty of describing time in the context of an infinite past vrs a finite past. This idea is that of an eternal circle of time that has always existed and always will exist."

Not sure I am grasping the problem of describing time as being infinite past and present. The universe is infinite therefore the space/time continuum is infinite. What is the difficulty with that concept?

The universe is not infinite.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Then im sorry jim your syllogism in post number one makes no sense to me whatsoever.

You seem to think I am describing a spiral flow of time where the flow of time comes back to a nearly equal segment of time. No, I am saying that the theory is that the flow returns to the same segment.

But that cannot work if the universe is causal but indeterminable which our universe is.

 

[Derideo_Te]

JB: "Today there is a new solution of sorts to the difficulty of describing time in the context of an infinite past vrs a finite past. This idea is that of an eternal circle of time that has always existed and always will exist."

Not sure I am grasping the problem of describing time as being infinite past and present. The universe is infinite therefore the space/time continuum is infinite. What is the difficulty with that concept?

The universe is not infinite.

Please provide a link proving that the universe is finite, thank you.