It may also be argued:

This is like matching the past events up to today against the past events up to yesterday: both are infinite, yet they differ in number. This is the fifth argument, which will be discussed below.

There are, however, significant differences between the two cases.

One is that, in that case, the events are the very same events, except that today’s events have been added. All this entails is that events without a beginning continue to increase, one after another. Here, however, these revolutions are not the same as those.

Another difference is that, in that case, the events up to today are assumed to match those up to yesterday, although neither series has a beginning. Such a matching is impossible. In effect, we are supposing them to be both equal and unequal in number: matching one against the other would entail equality despite their inequality, since they would share both the absence of a beginning and the same endpoint, while differing in number. This is an impossible supposition.

The two series of revolutions are different. Here, they share both the absence of a beginning and the same endpoint. Thus, according to these thinkers, their inequality in number coexists with their shared absence of an end. This requires no hypothetical assumption that could be dismissed as impossible, unlike the other case.

Nevertheless, this comparison resembles the other in that, in both cases, the past events have ceased to exist. It also resembles it in that, in both cases, the events are assumed to come to an end on one side. The two cases therefore agree in these two respects and differ in the two respects mentioned earlier.