in phil often philosophers take neutral premises that have no human feeings attached to them , so that they can converse or debate away on a point to be made, effectively.
what does your logic say about: came after A, therefore A caused B.
A caused B .. just the way you when you walk .. you cant take the second step unless you ve taken the first step ... and if you try to be clever by not placing your foot on the ground at the first step and you land at the second spot .. but then that will be considered your first step ...
What if time and space are a loop... Then perhaps a caused b, but then z went back and caused a....
Doesnt seem logical, but considering how bizarre the Universe is turning out to be, reading quantum Physics and all, its more likely that stuff that seems way outside the norms of our perception may actually be true...
You mean converge to a single point once again as before the Big Bang?
..
Time is creation of allah.
It was created during big bang. so before big bang there was no before.
And where allah lives there is no after and before. or when we die we go to a place where there is no time.