Why Linear Time "Flow" insists that the universe must be finite?

[Alan McDougall]

Why Linear Time "Flow" makes it impossible for the universe to be eternal?

It goes something like this in a hypothetical eternal universe the "Start" point of time would be pushed back into the infinite past which would mean the arrow of time could never reach the present a real paradox.

Like the original photon of light or moment of time, which flow or speed are both finite, being pushed back into the eternal past. With the result of time never reaching the present, meaning the part of the universe we exist in, (namely our solar system) could never have come into existence

Without a beginning of time, there would be no zero entropic states because entropy could not increase because it can only increase in conjunction with the arrow of time "shooting" from the present into the future (in fact, entropy would not/could not be a fundamental reality in an eternal universe)


What I am trying to convey if there were a hypothetical universe eternal universe in which the arrow of time moves from the past to the present into the eternal future, in a linear way like it does in our universe, we have a paradox?

<<No beginning <<<.Time......<.Past Eternity<...............<Time> future > infinite gap "Never Reach now" > ?

Then?

The arrow of time would never have a point in time or a beginning and the arrow of time would never have reached us in the present meaning, we would not exist.

Like Usain Bolt, he waits for the start gun but finds he is receding infinitely backward into the past eternity, meaning no matter how hard he tries he will never get to the finish line, which is the present that the audience is waiting for him to appear and break to tape. We are the audience and will wait forever but Usain will never break the finish line tape

Time equates to Usain Bolt and our existence equates to our "Now" which leaves us with a paradox or oxymoron meaning we exist but we can not exist?

In fact, I think it is more of a philosophical question than a scientific one, but I know I am not the only one who have postulated this question, in a science debate

I have a headache guys correct me if my logic is wrong I am a mere mortal!

Allahu Akbar

Regards

Alan

[greenhill]

Welcome to the forum..

Two seriously hypothetical posts you have put out..

Isn't time 'relative'? It has been discovered thay as to travel faster time slows down? So time for different people travelling at different speeds are slightly different..

Besides, I feel time has only really taken a real significance on human life due to the need to plan and organise activities of life (preparing for winter for example)..

Over generations, the importance of time management became more and more pertinent.. but the concept is still very much human as we face death (meaning end of our time here on earth) but is it compatible with measuring it on a universal scale?

All these are well beyond my realm of understanding..


Wishing you a great stay.