On Nov 18, 2011, at 12:40 AM, Robert Cummings wrote:
> By you're reasoning since I did not exist before 1974 then time itself could 
> not possibly have existed before then either since I was not in existence to 
> perceive it. That's as ludicrous as suggesting time did not exist before the 
> big bang (presuming this model is correct).  Also, them's some fancy shmancy 
> words you're slinging about up there, but without a proof it's just farts in 
> the wind :) No more valid than a theory of creation or the big ass spaghetti 
> thingy majingy dude. Folded shmeality and phases of whatsyamacallit may well 
> be true, but provability of the non-existence of time before the big bang 
> theory is not provable by this model. However, what is valid is to take a 
> point of reference in time and infer a period before it. Thus before the big 
> bang is perfectly valid whether we could perceive it or not.
> Cheers,
> Rob.

Again, you have shown an uncanny insight into the way things are.  :-)



PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to