Debating a Theist: The Infinite Staircase

My constant debate theist (MG) insists that if there is a past temporal infinity, then it is impossible to get to the present, as you have to participate in an infinite number of events before you can get to any current event. He introduced the analogy of “the infinite ladder” and how if you climb such a ladder you will never reach the top. However, he confused his own analogy in a big way, as evidenced by the following series of exchanges made over many moons, and which I have improvised.

My key distinction here is that if you have a finite lifespan and you started an infinite amount of time ago, then you clearly can’t get to the present. However, if you were blessed with an infinite lifespan, such as an up quark (which cannot be created or destroyed), then no problem. A finite lifespan can only travel through a finite period of time; an infinite service life is not subject to such restrictions.

[Note: previous to-and-fro discussions resulted in the following exchanges.]

MG – “As such, you have a series where each event is closer to a line than the previous ones and eventually the series reaches that line. Infinite series can’t do that. It’s like having an infinite number of rungs. on a ladder, but claiming to have reached that top just now. It’s incoherent. “

JP – If you were climbing a ladder with infinite steps, why would you say that you have reached the top? We have already agreed that infinity has no endpoints; in other words, there is no cap.

MG – “If you agree that you can’t climb to the top of an infinite ladder, and you see someone above, the correct conclusion is that the ladder wasn’t infinite after all !!”

JP – Wow! It is 1) wrong to use the word “you” since “you” is a finite event, and 2) you destroyed all logic by saying that you “see someone at the top”. Since I have said that infinity has no end points, it is illogical for me to claim that I see someone (again a fallacy, since someone is also a finite event) at the end point.

MG – “The ladder is the past series of events (not” moments “;” events “, like the Civil War, my breakfast this morning, etc.) and it ends in the present event (I write this sentence) because that’s what what “past” MEANS. I passed all the rungs of the PAST event series and I am at the top (the present event). But, as you said, you cannot reach the top of an infinite ladder. Therefore, the past cannot It’s infinite “.

JP 1 – It is more than possible to go from an infinite past to here and as if you yourself have an infinite useful life. This is not a difficult concept.

JP 2 – Of course “you” can’t, as humans have a finite lifespan, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done, especially if you don’t have a finite lifespan. Now if you take an infinite time and infinite events, the two infinities cancel out and you only have time and events. You can cross any number of events if you have enough time. You can cross an infinite number of events if you have an infinite amount of time. I’m just going to substitute something that doesn’t have a finite lifespan (ie “you”) with something that does, let’s say a quark up. It doesn’t really matter the timing of your First Cause argument for the moment. Just tell me how old a quark up really is.

MG – “It was a current event, just like every rung on the ladder below me was once the current rung. I still can’t complete an infinite step climb. It is logically incoherent. It defies even your definition of” infinity “, and you know it. “

JP – Of course YOU cannot climb an infinite ladder as it is a temporally finite event. But if something (i.e. an up quark) is a temporarily infinite ‘event’ then I don’t see the problem.

MG – “So your argument is” well, I agree that you can’t get to the top of a staircase with infinite rungs, but … I guess that infinite particle MUST have, since it’s here and it’s infinite ” ? “

JP – The proof of the pudding is in eating. A temporarily infinite particle [like an up-quark] it is simply in the here and now. From what I know, it tunnelled through a wormhole, but here it is. Now you can deny this by ‘creating’ the particle out of existence, thus refuting or denying the idea that a particle is invincible!

MG – “[A]And you can’t get out of it saying “the proof is in the pudding”.

JP – But the proof IS in the pudding. The Cosmos is infinite and yet there are particles here and now. Deal with it! Now, even if there is an infinite past and an infinite future, your concept of “The Present Moment” where we find those particles has to fall somewhere on that timeline. Let’s call that noon in New York City (NYC). There was a noon in New York the day before. There will be a noon in New York the next day. It is no big deal to time travel that finite interval between noon on the day before “Present moment” and noon on the day after “Present moment,” a period of 48 hours. The existence of an infinite past / future is irrelevant. Now keep pushing that concept back and forth as much back and forth as your imagination can imagine.

MG – “From that particle’s frame of reference, something is happening right now, regardless of how other frames of reference consider” now. “And, if its lifespan is infinite, then it has passed and completed a truly infinite number of events. before the current one you’re going through now. Right? “

JP – Yes.

MG: “But you can’t actually complete an infinite number of steps before a point; that would be like climbing an infinite ladder and reaching the top rung. It’s impossible. You’ve already accepted it. Basically, just as R [another poster]You still agree with both premises, but refuse to accept the conclusion. “

JP – If you have a limited lifespan, you can complete a finite trip. By that same reasoning, if you have an infinite lifespan, you can complete an infinite journey (that is, an infinity that is up to the point you are naming), although there is still an infinite journey ahead. Infinity (from past to “point”) plus infinite (from “point” to future “remains equal to infinity).

MG – “I fully understand that you are saying that an infinitely long life particle could be in the middle of an infinity of events, but what I am saying is that it cannot actually have COMPLETED an infinite number of events before its current event, because that would be conceptually equivalent to climbing to the TOP of a ladder with infinite rungs. Do we agree on this (leaving aside what the alternatives would have to be, like creating matter / energy or anything else)? “

JP – No. Wouldn’t you agree that your infinite God could not have completed an infinite number of events before creating life, the Universe and everything according to Genesis 1 and Genesis 2? If your God could do that, then an infinitely long particle of life could have done the same. If your God couldn’t have completed an infinite number of events before His “In the Beginning,” then He’s not that all-powerful now, is He?

MG – “No, even God cannot have completed a really infinite number of events before a point … Completing a really infinite sequence before a point is logically incoherent. It violates the very concept of” infinity. “

JP – Wow! Now here I thought that your invisible magic man in the sky had some control over time. I stay corrected. Journal! I guess that means that a particle with an infinite lifespan is more powerful than your invisible magic man in the sky.

MG – “But you have admitted that an infinite set of steps cannot be completed, and that an infinitely long life particle would have gone through an infinite number of events before the current one. That is the same as saying that a staircase with the rungs infinities cannot be climbed to the top and yet this particle has done it. It is a self-contradiction … “

JP – Speaking of contradictions, “infinite rungs” and “up” is a logical contradiction quite unworthy of you. Anyway, the answer is “No.” Even if the particle has only reached the middle of the top of its ladder, it has still managed to traverse an infinite number of steps.

MG – “So, the problem with reaching the last rung of an infinite ladder is not that it is logically impossible to complete an infinity; it is just that the climber has not lived long enough? This is silly. You already agree. A number infinity of steps cannot be completed before a point because the very concept of infinity is that it never completes. But then you cheerfully put it aside when it would mean the particle must have done something logically impossible or your worldview needs to be adjusted and the past had a beginning. “

JP – While all answers are answers, not all answers are answers! Now here this: There is a big difference between what has an infinite lifespan (like a particle) and what has a finite lifespan (like you). You cannot climb an infinite ladder and live to tell about it; an elementary particle can continue. Even a particle will never reach the end, since infinity has no end, so your claim that there is a “top rung of an infinite ladder” is itself a totally absurd claim. I remember you were the one who introduced the ridiculous idea or concept of “the top rung of an infinite ladder.”

MG – “In any case, you have not understood the analogy of the ladder.”

JP – I understand that contrary to your statements, my statement is that you cannot have a higher rung on an infinite ladder. Case closed.

Discussion:

Isn’t there an infinite number of lines (analogy of steps on a ladder) that you could draw between the start line and the finish line of, say, a race? And yet both can start and finish the race!

Now the question for readers is, who is right? MG or JP?