Okay, so you guys are obviously not literature fanatics. Haha. Here's something you might find interesting:
>
This gentleman has posted a youtube "proof" of the existence of a deity. Now you may be thinking, "oh, very good, you've countered the argument of some random loser on youtube, hooray for you." But what troubles me is that this is how many people have convinced themselves of a philosophical "need" for there to be an infinite power in the universe. I applaud the attempt to apply some logic to the existence argument, but it is deeply flawed.
His theory involves asking if it's possible for there to have been an infinite amount of time before now. The example he presents is that if he offers to give me a chocolate bar after an infinite amount of time has passed, would I ever be able to claim the bar? Therefore he concludes that an infinite amount of time could not have already passed.
The problem I have with this is the use of the word 'amount.' Is infinity an amount? Certainly not! In fact isn't it quite the opposite? Infinite is the lack of amount. It is the status of not being finite. Instead of being an amount, infinity is more of a condition, or an assumption. If I asked how many integers exist, you would assume that there is no end to the progression of integers (hence, infinite).
An infinite amount of time could not have already passed because infinite is not an amount. Amounts of time pass, like two minutes or three days. For an amount of time to pass, it must have a beginning and an end. Saying "three days passed" means absolutely nothing without context. Saying "an hour has passed since I took a bath" marks a definite beginning and end: the finish of my bath, and now. So to say "an infinite amount of time can pass" is absurd. There is no beginning, for one thing, and there is no amount for another.
