I'm conceding things such as the number three, that you mentioned before.Jac wrote:
I hear you keep asking about why something physical can't be beginningless (sorry, I won't use the word eternal--they mean different things). Are you conceding that immaterial things can be beginningless? Is your question limited only to physical things?
I'm focusing only on the physical. And whether or not anything physical can be without beginning. With the law of entropy, for example, I just can't see it being possible.
And while we're at it, I think beginningless and eternal are interchangeable in this instance. If something is without beginning, it has to be constant or unchanging. And if it's unchanging, it must be eternal. Right?
I don't think it matters for what I'm saying. I just can't think of anything physical, that doesn't have a cause of its existence. And if you're talking about a series of things, you're just kicking the can back in time. Still with the same issue of how that first thing came into existence.And are you talking about a single thing or a series of things? The universe is not a single entity. Is is a collection of entities. When people suggest a beginningless universe, they are not saying that a single thing has always existed, but that there have always been things causing other things.