From: Blunderov (squooker@mweb.co.za)
Date: Thu Jul 25 2002 - 05:16:28 MDT
joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
<snip>
However, 'everything (the universe) cannot be relative, for
there is nothing outside the universe for it to be relative TO; it is
all- encompassing and sui generis, and as such cannot be said to itself
occupy a position relative to anything else, for there is nothing else
(this
is the meaning of 'universe - all).
<snap>
[Blunderov]
Isn't this a bit like the mathematician who defined his sheep into the
pen instead of opening the gate? Could I not just as truthfully say that
there are places in the universe where time has not yet gone?
Perhaps I can pre-empt the possible argument that any place where time
has not yet gone is not a "place" by definition, by mentioning that if
this is so, then necessarily the very early universe did not exist in
space because time could not have existed in the same way as it does
now?
Yours argumentatively
Warm regards
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:49 MDT