Time had an absolute beginning, however we believe something existed before time did. But according to time, nothing happened before time itself happened. This may not be a good way of saying how old something is. Time reversing is possibly irrelevant because we, or atleast I, don't know the connection of the flow of time with entropy.

What I'm saying is that entropy may be a better way to show how old something is or how long its been around than time because time is not absolute. Knowing that time isn't absolute and continuing to measure based on that is strange. That would be like basing time on the existance of the US. Before 1776, nothing ever existed in the universe. Perhaps entropy is absolute, ever present with the singularity or whatever existed before the big bang.

• Time likely does not have a beginning. - alexander - March 27, 2001 - 16:55 UTC
  • it has to! - drunknown - March 27, 2001 - 18:48 UTC
    • time - egauldin - March 27, 2001 - 23:47 UTC
      • Why should time be a loop? - alexander - March 29, 2001 - 18:19 UTC
        • Loopy - egauldin - March 31, 2001 - 03:04 UTC
          • Yes, real time existed before Big Bang. - alexander - April 4, 2001 - 21:48 UTC
            • Black holes do not have real time - yanniru - April 5, 2001 - 17:01 UTC
              • when did time begin - bennzor - November 20, 2003 - 20:03 UTC
    • whats wrong with using the big bang as a start? - libbie468 - March 28, 2001 - 22:55 UTC