Hello Todd.
31 Jan 98 21:51, Todd Henson wrote to Mr. Rigor:
 TH> By my repeated use of the word "continuum" throughout the beginning of
 TH> this thread, I would say my position is clear. Time is like a river -
 TH> in order to conveniently measure it, you can divide it into gallons,
 TH> pints, or whatever, but that doesn't mean it's not a continuum. Its
 TH> true that the units used to measure a river, or time, are actually
 TH> passing by as per the measurement process, but that does not mean that
 TH> it isn't a continuum. However way you look at it, the effect is the
 TH> same = it is flowing from one place to another.
Noted.
However, I do not see the need for there to be only finitely many 
_intervals_of_time_ either.  A number of people seem to have suggested
a model of time much like that of the space of positive (or possibly 
non-negative) real numbers, and I don't see any problem with "time not
progressing" in that model.  Nor have I observed any phenomena which
would suggest that particular model does not describe time accurately.
...
 MR>> I see no reason to conclude either of these:
 MR>> (infinite time continuum) => (no "passage" of time)
 MR>> (finite time continuum) => (some moments "have not happened")
 TH> So, the future already happened?
(1)  I don't see how my objection above prompts that question.
(2)  To answer the question, I'd say "one would think not".  The word 
"happened" is conjugated in the past tense, and the past tense is used
to refer to events in that realm of events/memories that is called
"the past".  The "future", as commonly defined, is disjoint from the "past" 
and so the word "happened" does not seem appropriate.  I think
the proper English syntax would be "So, the future will happen?"
...
 TH> The only thing you seem to able to give me is simply saying "no".
That was the role I assigned myself when replying to your message. I wanted
to point out what I thought were serious (even fatal) flaws in your argument.
...
 TH>  If there was a point in which nothing at all existed (no forces, God,
 TH>  quantum probabilities, etc) then how would anything ever exist? How
 TH> did the universe get here?
If nothing at all existed, then how could the "point" you refer to exist?
It seems like saying "if x is an element of an empty set, then..."

Maybe that "point" is the cause of Universe!

Regarding the question, "how did the universe get here", I am inclined to 
respond that Universe _is_ "here".  Moreover, "here" _is_ Universe.  If 
you're asking what I think the "cause" of Universe is, let me respond by 
saying that I don't believe that Universe has a cause, nor do I believe that 
Universe does not have a cause.  I do believe that neither proposition is 
"obviously" true, and I also believe that I have not had a particularly good 
reason to adopt either of those two beliefs (Universe caused, Universe 
uncaused).  It may be fun to speculate regarding this matter, but such 
speculation has never risen to the point of belief in my consciousness.
Have a nice time interval.
Mr. Rigor
--- GoldED 2.50+
---------------