Possibly. Conceptually, I would agree. However, if you have an object of infinite density, then even a slight sliver of the object would have the same density as the whole object because every part of the object would have infinite density. So, take a sphere with infinite density. Split it in half, both halves are infinitely dense. There is no division (either conceptual or actual) that leaves me with an object with less than an infinite density. We can divide time conceptually into moments, but we are still left with an infinite amount of actual time between each conceptual moment. I agree with what you are saying but I think there is something that has not been addressed. A point, by definintion has no mass and no spacial extension (it does not take up space). Further, without mass or spacial extension, it follows that it doesn't exist in time. A point is nothing actual. No actual thing is made up of actual points because, by definition, actual points do not exist. Points are conceptual in nature. If time actually exists, can it consist of what is actually nothing? A line is conceptual, but there are no actual lines. You can't experience a line. We can experience space and time. Space is "composed" (for lack of a better word) of nothing. Can we say the same for time? If we can, then how are we capable of experiencing it? If time is a continuum, then there are no actual divisions. It simply is. Futher, as a continuum, it is not made up of an infinite number of actual moments, but is composed entirely of itself, an indivisible whole. So perhaps the line analogy doesn't really work at all? What do you think? Of course you can transverse an infinite amount of nothing (conceptual divisions). But can you transverse an infinite amount of *something*? You never know. If relativity theory is true, then it always has been true but the idea didn't come around until the last hundred years. How do you respond to the astronomers and physicists that assert that time had a beginning and/or that it began with the big bang? I am curious.