Sorry but that's idiotic, time is a continuum. ASSUMING a belief in the idiotic big bang theory, then you might claim that the physical material basis to MEASURE time would have existed only after the big bang, but time stretches to infinity in both directions.
I hear Christian yuppies claiming
>>Time was also created in the big bang.
>
>Sorry but that’s idiotic, time is a continuum.
Why is it idiotic? Isn’t time measured in the relative changes between two [or more] objects? If there are less than two objects in the universe then how would time impact that single object? (This singular object would be ‘atomic’ in the absolute sense of the word, nothing smaller or sub-component would exist... otherwise there would be more than one actual object, which we have limited ourselves to.)
>ASSUMING a belief in the idiotic big bang theory, then you might claim that the physical material basis to MEASURE time would have existed only after the big bang, but time stretches to infinity in both directions.
Does it now? Where is your proof of that assertion? Couldn’t time just as well be a straight line segment or [geometrically-speaking] a ray? If time is infinite in both directions, then are there cycles? If there *ARE* cycles wouldn’t it be more convenient/accurate to represent time as a circle? If there are no cycles then doesn’t the second law of thermodynamics guarantee a future-state where the universe is absolutely homogeneous? (And, in that case, what would be the point/purpose of time past that point?)