The Principle of Explosion and The Big Bang

assuming that there was a beginning that is

All appears from a single source, thus single source as universal is the point considering all phenomenon are both composed of and compose points.

Time is a concept not a fundamental reality
Change is the phenomenon oftentimes confused or paired up with this concept call "time" which is just a mental construct that we have developed as a way of understanding why we observe change and experience at ourselves.

And yes things like people four houses or any berries natural or man-made thing has a beginning and an end but I'm not talking about the things made from matter because obviously he does have a beginning but the material it's made from supposedly science says has a beginning as well

IE the Big Bang however there is the other option that everything has always been here and there was no big Bang.

Remember it's a hypothesis not a fact and the only thing observable is that everything has always been here and when you look back in time is all you find is stuff obviously you can't find not stuff.

>>>All things are reducible to concepts.  Time, while a concept, is a fundamental reality as well given it observes the change of one phenomenon to another.<<<

no people observe the change of one phenomenon to another time is just time it doesn't observe anything.



>>>The Big Bang is the continual creation and destruction of phenomenon from a single point. <<<

technically it's a theory that scientist came up with for an answer so they wouldn't lose their tenure and all funding needed to continue their plush lives and this theory was fabricated based off of light spectrums and mathematical equations with a dash here and there of justification.

>>> All phenomenon result from a movement to and from a point or set of points. <<<
which one is it a point or a set of points? Because those are two different things.

>>>In these respects phenomenon follow a continual ebb and flow as expansion and contraction.  An organism results from the point of contact from an egg and sperm and it reduces to a series of atoms as point particles. <<<

as I previously had already said I was not talking about the short-term temporal things such as a person's life when it starts and ends I was talking about matter itself and how it has always been and didn't have a start point.

>>>There is no proof everything has always been here given the evidence shows everything has a beginning and end.<<<
no things made of matter seemed to have beginnings and ends as they continually change but the matter that they're made out of and the environment they are in has always been and that is observable what is not observable is the atomistic concept of a big boom boom happening and everything suddenly existing that's not observable

>>>We observe through time as observations change. <<<

Correct that's why i said time is a concept made by man.


>>>2.  And what is your source as to the reason behind the origin of the Big Bang theory?<<<


not important to the conversation at hand

>>>3.  The bird from a distance exists as a point, up close it is composed of points.<<<

no the bird at a distance is hard to see and up close you can see it in great detail.


>>>4.  Prove matter has always been given all phenomenon in reality have beginning and end points.<<<

once again phenomenon has beginnings and ends as it's nature however that is not the same as matter itself I am talking about this galaxy this planet and the ability for stuffed we made out of stuff I'm not talking about the things that that stuff does

This is a lot like the Christian vs atheist argument when Christians say prove God doesn't exist and the atheist say I can't prove the lack of something but you have to prove that he does exist because you're the one making the claim

likewise I cannot prove something didn't at one point not exist
and i am not the one making the claim you are so you would have to prove that existence had a beginning.


>>>5.  Prove the totality of matter has existed always<<<

See reply to #4

>>>1. Time is a process of change, we observe time empirically as change. All concepts reflect a physical reality.<<<

No time is a numerical process of counting this is why clocks have numbers and count them instead of constantly documenting things changing.

>>>2. Yet you claim an ad hominum attacking the person behind the idea.<<<

Can you point out exactly what i said that tou feel was an attack on you personally?

>>>3. From a distance it appears as a point, up close each part upon closer inspection is composed of points.<<<

No not unless you live in a world made of grass burrs.

>>>4. Not the same comparison, as I am asking for the proof of something always existing. I am not asking for a negative to be proved. The burden is on you.<<<

You are asking a nonsensical thing because what is and has always been is existence and that's a fact not a claim
And so saying that it at one time didn't exist is a claim requiring proof.

>>>5. All phenomenon, as empirically observed, have beginnings and ends. Matter must follow the same rules.<<< again phenomenon wherein things change is not the same thing as existence itself .

>>>1. Counting is the ratio of one phenomenon fitting inside another. The minute is defined by the seconds which fit in it. The dropping of sand, in a sand clock, is defined by the amount of sand in the resovior relative to another resovior. Time is ratios, ratios are the fitting of one part into another.<<<

That is a perspective created by the person

But i am not talking about how a person perceives time im talking about what time is.


>>>2. Attacking the person which developed the idea, not me.<<<

I didn't ask for the definition of ad hominem i asked for you to tell me which comment I made that you specifically feel was an ad hominem.

>>>3. Any object from a distance appears as a point. Any Object Up Close Is Composed Of Point Particles.<<<

This is far to trivial to wast time on and i see no point it a dressing because i think it is just an issue of preferred style of explaining things and that's to be expected do to cultural differences.

>>>4. I am talking about matter, not existence.<<<

In that case I agree with you matter does change and depending on where person draws the line you can say that Apple didn't exist now it exists and its own to not exist

I was talking about existence and there is a difference between the 2 obviously.

>>>5. Existence occurs through change. Pure change, during an instantaneous singular appears as no change. What does not change is the singularity <<<

I wouldn't necessarily say that although it would be hard to find something that's not changing that in existence to use as an example

but just because the majority of things change and exist doesn't necessarily mean something can't exist without change

But I haven't the slightest clue how to demonstrate that