No its okay I get the problem now, I really hadn't run across Eternal used like that before.
Well maybe someone had and I completely misunderstood what they meant like with you, always that risk.
Passing an English exam does not guarantee I always get it right
I much prefer science terms they are so much easier to deal with and one does not get blindsides by double meanings. There are still two possibilities I need to understand which you mean so I can close the system for QM.
This goes back to an earlier problem QM can only work in a fully defined system or it wouldn't work at all. Remember we can't let you destroy information either or it breaks down. So if you wanted to use a sort of naive version that there is infinite time before us and infinite time after us that concept is brutally falsified because QM is working here and now. You want to use that naive definition as in the dictionary you are in religion domain and inconsistent with science.
What we can sort of allow QM to work here and now and open up time in two distinct ways
1.) We can allow time to loop back on itself and our universe becomes a closed timelike curve (CTC).
2.) We can allow time to run outside space but we then need a boundary condition (something like a cauchy horizon).
So they are your two options which do you want?
Of coarse the start point for the QM time we know will be the big bang, end point unknown.
I am not sure if you get what we have really done in that is make our time relative to something you would call "universal time" but be careful they aren't necessarily the same. It is a bit like space and time are the same to QM it encodes in either but they aren't the same to us. They may also be somewhat the same I have no data to say one way or other.
What you did in all that was allowed QM to close in the relative time section (so we match experiments today) and you can have some concept of absolute time outside that.
Does that describe what you want to do?
EDIT: Ok so I decided I better let you on the nasty setup this is creating. You won't realize it at all but if you take either of the two options you are going into the different major versions of string theory. That is how string theory keeps consistency with QM and I warned you about the encoding looking nothing like what we see.
I was going to see if I could get you to believe in string theory because you are basically there as a layman you just don't recognize it.
So Bill S string theory or religion where we going?
