[EvaH (OP)]

Nic wants to know:

So I have a very basic understanding of time and space, and a bit of mathematics. I have trouble understanding how its possible for us to be here if we look at the concept of time. My understanding is that time has always been there and that there was in essence then never a beginning, so how is it possible for there to be a point in time where we exist?

What do you think?

[jeffreyH]

The problem arises when you talk about points in time. Time isn't a static thing. You can talk about points in space and know that they don't suddenly become inaccessible. In the case of time a "point" moves into the past and does become inaccessible. This is  why people have difficulty with the concept of spacetime.

[Colin2B]

My understanding is that time has always been there and that there was in essence then never a beginning, so how is it possible for there to be a point in time where we exist?

What do you think?

It’s very similar to standing on a road that stretches out in front of you and behind, there is still a point where you are standing. As you walk forward that point changes. So it is as you move along the timeline, the only difference is you can choose to walk along the road, but you have no choice but to continually move along the timeline.

[guest46746]

In science there is no process for randomness. Perceived occurences of randomness maybe observed. This perception of randomness however cannot be duplicated, the slit experiment duplicating the exact random pattern of outliners of photons, this would disprove randomness.  Models can be created to mimic randomness, but the generation of such models all rely on an algorithms, eg. the lottery. Randomness is a placeholder for something that requires an infinite value and whether that infinte value is repeatable? In this regard it's projection is similar to future Time.  We rely on a past and present Now to project a future, but that future is random as to not yet having occurred,  as such its value is nothing. The future is merely an empty placeholder for what may or maynot occur. Can randomness be defined as both an infinite number and zero?  Can a mathematical algorythm determine if lightning stike twice in/at the same point? A probabilty solution would need to require both an infinite number solution and a zero posiibilty solution. The reference frame is essential, all frames must entail high degrees of near 99% certainty, eg, a rain cloud in the same place, the wind conditions, the rotation of the Earth. ..........  so a 1% chance of an infinite number, compared to a 99% chance of a zero occurrence.   So science cannot disprove randomness using an infinite number with a 1% degree of certainty. nor can it disprove a zero possibilty with a 99% of certainty.  Uncertainty in this scientific regard is certain, lol

What we can prove by logic, is to conclude that consciousness substanciate existence. This takes your question out of the scientific realm. Taking probabilty out of the scientific realm leaves you only with what is and what is not! lol 

What was is predicated on what is, what is, is predicated on conscious awareness, what will be, requires a Higher Authority to answer that with any degree of certainity! lol

No answer is better then the wrong one! lol

[Bill S]

The problem arises when you talk about points in time. Time isn't a static thing.

That is the case if you are talking about “tensed time” which is “now relative”.

Colin says: “It’s very similar to standing on a road that stretches out in front of you and behind,”.  Obviously, he is using “tensless time” which equates to clock time, and is regarded as being static.

On closer inspection, one could, with equal validity, regard tensed time as being static, and tensless time as moving.

[Bill S]

Nic, was your question answered?

I ask this because I fail to see the problem.  If time goes infinitely into the past and future; then time is always present, and with it, the potential for change.  One such change brought our Universe into existence; Homo sapiens followed.

In fact, it can be reasoned that every possible change must happen, an infinite number of times.  Not only is there a point in time at which we exist; there is an infinity of such points.

Why might that not be the case?

[Bill S]

The question seems pure philosophical, and this is a physics site, so perhaps the question is best asked on a different forum.

In general, I would agree with this, but the question: “has time always been there?” is quite different from the question: has something always been there?”.  However, the two are closely linked.

Turn the second question into a statement: “there must always have been something”.  This could be falsified if someone were to find a physical example of something emerging from nothing.  I suspect that “someone” would be a physicist.

[guest46746]

4 evaH, asking questions in other people's name is the MO!  lol. evaH never participates further. What's the motivation? Surmising?  could be! lol 

[guest4091]

Nic wants to know:

So I have a very basic understanding of time and space, and a bit of mathematics. I have trouble understanding how its possible for us to be here if we look at the concept of time. My understanding is that time has always been there and that there was in essence then never a beginning, so how is it possible for there to be a point in time where we exist?

What do you think?

Time is pointless!

[yor_on]

Emerging from nothing?
How about a Big Bang

Without there are no dimensions to speak of, except theoretically.

[yor_on]

Nic, you have to build on what you know, that's physics. We know there is a arrow of time, and we know we exist inside it. The proofs of that are as basic as one stone, if adding one more, must make two stones. It's also called axioms, things that we have to accept. The problem of time is not that it always might have existed, which we don't know, but what specifically is this arrow we find. some relate it to entropy, seeing that as a equivalence.
=
In 'Einsteinian' terms the universe consist of four dimensions. Length, width, depth and 'time'.  They are what makes this universe, and they are 'plastic'. They can change depending on your speed and mass, even the 'time' you measure something to take. But it is still a arrow pointing in one direction, forward in time, as even when you define some other clock to stop ticking (Event Horizon of a Black Hole) your own still ticks. And would you go there to see for yourself your clock and that other clock you studied afar would be found to have the same arrow as yours, synchronizing their ticks.

But if we are to take it literally then the arrow is a result of the Big Bang. what was before is not known.