The Instigator
daley
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ricksterpr0
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Time and Energy Have no Beginning From a Biblical and/or Scientific Viewpoint

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/18/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 698 times Debate No: 59126
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (12)
Votes (0)

 

daley

Pro

It is often said that the Big Bang was the beginning of all time, space, energy and matter. While I believe that the Big Bang happened, I will be arguing that this event was not the beginning of time or energy. My position is that TIME and Energy HAVE NO BEGINNING. They are eternal, they always existed.

I will also be arguing the sub-point that time IS NOT LINEAR, but that past, present and future all exist simultaneously.

My opponent my argue from either science, the Bible, or both (though I will accept also philosophical and rational arguments) that the Big Bang was the beginning of all time and energy, and that time is linear.

My arguments are simple.

1) Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to another. Therefore, the Big Bang is not the creation of energy, just the conversion of energy into another form.

2) No matter how far back in time we think of, we can always think of a time before that. So if the Big Bang began time, we could always refute this nothing by thinking of the state of affairs BEFORE the Bang occurred. If it did occur at some moment, then its an event in history, in time, for events can only occur in time. Thus, there was a time before the Big Bang when nothing had as yet, for lack of a better word, exploded.

I see no reason to think of time as merely the occurrence of events, because if all events stops, one could still say that events have stopped for one hour and counting, two days and counting, and when the events continue some amount of time must have passed between the freezing and continuing of events - otherwise they did not stop. The same is true with BEFORE the beginning of the universe at the Big Bang. One could think of HOW LONG the singularity or whatever it was that exploaded/expanded was there before it went boom. This is time, even without any events happening.

Finally, if time has no beginning, it logically cannot have an end called "the present." There is no starting point for time to count from so that we can call where we are the present. If time is eternal, then it was always there, thus the past, present and future must exist simultaneously, for any break in time would imply a start at some point.

If someone was counting since eternity, he would logically take eternity to reach the present, thus, linearly time would never catch up to the point at which we are now. So all of time must already exist.

Please do not accept this debate if you don't believe the Big Bang is the beginning of the universe, and the beginning of all time, space, matter and energy. Opening arguments begin in round one.
ricksterpr0

Con

I accept your challenge. I will be arguing that the big bang is the begging of time, matter, and energy.

Good luck Pro
Debate Round No. 1
daley

Pro

daley forfeited this round.
ricksterpr0

Con

ricksterpr0 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
daley

Pro

daley forfeited this round.
ricksterpr0

Con

The debate is here. Do not vote on this one please. http://www.debate.org...
Debate Round No. 3
daley

Pro

daley forfeited this round.
ricksterpr0

Con

ricksterpr0 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
daley

Pro

daley forfeited this round.
ricksterpr0

Con

ricksterpr0 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by daley 2 years ago
daley
I didn't know that's what it was called.
Posted by Strycora 2 years ago
Strycora
So you're arguing for eternalism, basically the opposite of presentism?
Posted by daley 2 years ago
daley
By the way guys, my opponent and I are having this same debate elsewhere. He has posted his opening argument for round one and I have responded, so please, look at how the debate is going on that thread and make your comments there.
Posted by daley 2 years ago
daley
For some philosophers, time is ONLY a measurement of distance like meters and inches; but that's for those who hold to the notion that the present is all that exists and all that ever will. For them, the past and future do not exist anywhere except in our minds, which brings time down to nothing more than a concept created by man to measure distances between events. However, I view time as a container in which all events take place, so that the past, present and future are all simultaneously occurring somewhere.

If there was nothing for literally, an eternal amount of time BEFORE the universe was created, then the universe would never have been created if one has to count linearly from the past towards the present. Since there is no starting point in the eternal past, it would literally take forever to reach the moment of creation. So I envision that time exists in all three states together.
Posted by Strycora 2 years ago
Strycora
I could say that the Singularity is a three dimensional reality that exists in parallel with the 4 dimensional universe, because the Singularity exists outside of time. Perhaps this universe is just one possibility that arises from an eternal Singularity.
Posted by Strycora 2 years ago
Strycora
Time is a measure of change. Events (like the universe) have beginnings and endings. To say that time itself either has a beginning or has no beginning seems meaningless to me. Can you please explain?
Posted by ricksterpr0 2 years ago
ricksterpr0
is there a way to end this debate without a winner/loser since we have a duplicate?
Posted by ricksterpr0 2 years ago
ricksterpr0
I apologize I was confused as there were no set guidelines.
Posted by daley 2 years ago
daley
You were supposed to post your argument in round 1. I will redo this debate and let you post your argument in round 1.
Posted by LostintheEcho1498 2 years ago
LostintheEcho1498
That is something I can agree with but for a different reason. Time is something that humans have made. It is the only thing in this universe that we can give substance that nature cannot. Therefore, by that definition, time has never nor ever will exist because it is wholly man-made. As for energy, Law of Conservation of Energy proves that one.
No votes have been placed for this debate.