A Scientific Model of Eternity
Peter Lynds has put forth a model in which the Universe, due to the
irreversible second law of thermodynamics, is an eternally recurring oscillation of
energy. In his paper, On a Finite Universe with no Beginning or End, he
essentially explains, if I am understanding his theory correctly, that all energy
which exists inside the closed vacuum of the Universe is in the eternal act of
oscillating (expanding and contracting) from its primordial source, the Big
Bang/Big Crunch. After the Big Bang "Creation Event" the Universe expands until
it runs out of energy, eventually condensing to a point where it cannot contract
any longer without violating the second law. By this irreversible law, the
configuration is forced to reverse itself (instantaneously, as there is no such thing
as time) back to the primordial source (as an explosion). The events will be the
exact same. The Big Bang is the Big Crunch in reciprocal relation. Time, as we
conceive of it, doesn't exist. We are all of the same primordial source, and our
very existence is merely a representation of this primordial energy obeying its
eternal law. There is only one moment which is the eternal Universe.
"If the universe were positively spatially curved and destined for a big crunch, this
naturally posed the question of what might happen next. There seemed to be two
general options: either the universe would contract to a singularity, a point of infinite
density and geometric space-time curvature, and everything would cease to be; or
alternatively, it might bounce back with a great explosion. This big bounce would be
much like, or possibly exactly the same as, the big bang before it. If the latter, and the
universe had exactly the same configuration as the previous big bang, not only would
the explosion be exactly the same, but so too would the entire evolution of the
universe following it."
Peter Lynds, 'On a Finite Universe with no Beginning or End'
"To those familiar with Albert Einstein’s two theories, Special and General Relativity,
the absence of a present moment or now underlying a dynamical physical process will
also not come as a great surprise. Einstein has shown us that there is not a universal
now in time holding sway throughout the entire universe. Judgments of simultaneity
or of a now do not always necessarily agree, but instead are relative: relative to ones
state of motion and spatial proximity in relation to gravity. Furthermore, relativity’s
mathematical formalisation has seen the introduction of a block universe in which
events do not take place as such, as we subjectively seem to perceive them, but are all
mapped out together in a four dimensional space-time in which nothing particularly
happens at all. Events are just there, mixed together, sharing equal temporal status,
having neither happened in the past, nor happening at present, or about to happen in
the future (for a more detailed discussion, see for example, Davies, 1995). In addition
to this, recall that it is precisely due to there not being a precise static instant or
present moment in time underlying a dynamical physical process, that motion,
physical continuity and time (relative interval) are indeed possible in the first instance
(Lynds, 2003). The message is clear, if somewhat counter-intuitive: a flowing time
and progressive present moment are the products of our subjective perceptions and
underlying neurobiology, without actual physical foundation in nature.”
"There exists, therefore, for the individual, an I-time, or subjective time. This in itself
is not measurable."-- Albert Einstein
Peter Lynds, 'Subjective Perception of Time and a Progressive Present Moment: The
Neurobiological Key to Unlocking Consciousness'