i dont believe these necessarily to be of diametric relation with reference to a single repeating or retroverse sequence by which the universe is controlled or is confined within. it would seem that if the cyclical pulsation (expansion/contraction) of the universe were the foundation to the evolution of the universe, then there would be no real eternity and there would a sort of incongruence between what is lawfully possible and what is physically possible. for instance if the universe just kept expanding and contracting, the same bodies of matter and dimensions could only "forever" exist. while the infinite possibilities could never get a chance because of the actualized possibilities that are trapped by the overall repeated and "static" process (start to finish). it would also raise the dilemma of where did it all come from, what was before the primacy and what is after the extremity.
it would seem to me that "constant change" may be more rational, meaning, all i can concluded from anything ive ever heard is that theres always something more. further, absolute beginning and end although, apparent at casual glance have never been proved rather been consistenly disproved.

big bangs though may be part of the process, it may just be a momentous shift within the gradual shift, or may just be that all universal evolution is constant and appears momentous "at times" via time warping. like vidoetaping a flower bloom over days and then watching the same sequence in super fast forward. what is gradual, seems an explosion. but still it is caused by before and followed by after, thats the only eternity i can imagine thuis far.

peace

• the same bodies of matter and dimensions could only "forever" ex - yanniru - March 11, 2003 - 13:15 UTC
  • i see - murat - March 11, 2003 - 20:23 UTC
    • I think you are right - yanniru - March 11, 2003 - 20:43 UTC
      • my mistake - murat - March 11, 2003 - 23:03 UTC
        • Elector-weak Temperature - yanniru - March 12, 2003 - 14:06 UTC