This morning when I read “the choice vocabulary of GRE”, I noticed an explanatory entry of “eternal” casually. It said: “without beginning or end”.
I meditated what I had seen and then a question emerged: Does the “eternity” exist?
May be eternity is the conception only in human system because so called “beginning” and “end” are human’s creations, they may just be something only relative to human. I mean, perhaps to universe, there is not “eternity” at all. This is not because I say to cosmos there is not “beginning” and “end”, for it is obvious that “the Explosive Theory” is a persuasive disproof. The question is that if we should define “beginning” and “end” all over again on the base of universe. What on earth is the meaning of “beginning” and “end” to cosmos? Of course, whether human have the ability to define or understand something at the same height as universe is another question, since we are human, only one of the minuscule parts of the whole universe. In contrast of cosmos, our ability is limited and we will never escape from the limitation of human. So it seems that nobody can know the absolute truth at all.
So let’s come back to the initial question: Does the “eternity” exist on earth? Yes, it does! At least it exists in the form of a human concept. It is a mote in immense universe itself.
There are some questions I am not sure about:
1. Which is correct? “To cosmos” or “to the cosmos”?
2. Which is the best? “An entry of explanation of ‘eternal’ ” ; “ an explanation entry of ‘eternal’” or “ an explanatory entry of ‘eternal’”?
It is certain that there are some defects in my writing, if “You” find them, please tell me, I will be thankful to you.