Infinite Universe?
-
Supercalifragilisticoespialidoso?
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
If you say it loud enough, we won't notice that you spelt it wrong! :laugh:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
raddevus wrote:
science cannot deal with infinite.
The sum of all positive integer numbers from 1 to infinity is -1/12. Proven by science :)
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
The sum of all positive integer numbers from 1 to infinity is -1/12. Proven by science
When I was a kid, I wanted to see what the largest integer the PDP-11 could count to. Then I wondered what happened when you added 1 to that. It was amusing to discover that I then found the smallest negative number. Marc
Latest Article - Create a Dockerized Python Fiddle Web App Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
-
The inability to form an infinite sidewalk from a finite amount of matter doesn't prove the universe to be finite.
I know. I was providing something for you to walk on. The point is if you could travel faster than the speed of light toward the end of the Universe then at some point all energy would be exhausted (not from travel but from the limit naturally created by an end of energy and you'd be at the end of the Universe. A physical thing must have an end -- a physical thing without an end is only theoretical. That is why we call it physical and not metaphysical. And I'm not saying that only in theory does the Universe end, I'm saying in fact it does because it is a physical object (we physical objects know this and study this and have our existence in a physical Universe). The instant you say the Universe is otherwise is the same instant it becomes non-physical and my final point then is that "all bets are off". So, the Universe (as studied by Scientists,Philosophers and Mathematicians) is a physical beast and as such has a limit and so has an end. Now you've heard the end of this discussion. :) Since, I've decided I am right. Yes, I'm kidding, but I do think what I've said makes sense. The Universe, if physical -- and it is, must have a limit. And if it isn't physical, then we aren't either. :laugh:
-
raddevus wrote:
we know that even the energy (thus mass) is of a limited quantity in the Universe.
That is not known, unless you use the zero-energy universe hypothesis, but then it doesn't limit the amount of mass either since the net amount of energy is independent of the amount of stuff.
I'm saying something much more important here. I'm saying that the Universe is physical. If it isn't then we are talking about something that could even be an intelligence and then forget about understanding anything. I'm saying that since the Universe is physical and we are physical then it has a limit. An infinite anything instantly goes beyond physical and instantly becomes metaphysical and we cannot even hope to begin to study it. So, if we are going to believe in a mechanical Universe then it has a limit. If it has a limit then what is on the other sides? That is the real question. If it doesn't have a limit (if it were infinite) then it is not mechanical and physical.
-
Super Lloyd wrote:
or the surface of a doughnut....
So when we find the end of the universe the other side will be the counter of a bakery?
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Imagine you are an ant on the surface of the doughnut.... What do you find at the end of the doughnut? where is the end? what is the sound of one handed man clapping?
A new .NET Serializer All in one Menu-Ribbon Bar Taking over the world since 1371!
-
Imagine you are an ant on the surface of the doughnut.... What do you find at the end of the doughnut? where is the end? what is the sound of one handed man clapping?
A new .NET Serializer All in one Menu-Ribbon Bar Taking over the world since 1371!
Super Lloyd wrote:
Imagine you are an ant on the surface of the doughnut.... What do you find at the end of the doughnut?
I see empty space above the doughnut. But perception does not change reality in this case.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
I know. I was providing something for you to walk on. The point is if you could travel faster than the speed of light toward the end of the Universe then at some point all energy would be exhausted (not from travel but from the limit naturally created by an end of energy and you'd be at the end of the Universe. A physical thing must have an end -- a physical thing without an end is only theoretical. That is why we call it physical and not metaphysical. And I'm not saying that only in theory does the Universe end, I'm saying in fact it does because it is a physical object (we physical objects know this and study this and have our existence in a physical Universe). The instant you say the Universe is otherwise is the same instant it becomes non-physical and my final point then is that "all bets are off". So, the Universe (as studied by Scientists,Philosophers and Mathematicians) is a physical beast and as such has a limit and so has an end. Now you've heard the end of this discussion. :) Since, I've decided I am right. Yes, I'm kidding, but I do think what I've said makes sense. The Universe, if physical -- and it is, must have a limit. And if it isn't physical, then we aren't either. :laugh:
Let me see if I've understood your argument:
- We are physical;
- The universe is physical;
- We have a finite size;
- Therefore, the universe must have a finite size.
Is that an accurate summary? Because if it is, I could replace "finite size" with "bumhole", and the argument starts to look rather silly. :laugh:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Imagine you are an ant on the surface of the doughnut.... What do you find at the end of the doughnut? where is the end? what is the sound of one handed man clapping?
A new .NET Serializer All in one Menu-Ribbon Bar Taking over the world since 1371!
Super Lloyd wrote:
what is the sound of one handed man clapping?
Piece of cake[^]! :-D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Thats, just like Drakes equation, full of assumptions. And like Drake, you are being rather optimistic. We already know that there is no sign of intelligent life in the observable universe. So, we have to consider the possibility that we are living on the first planet with some form of life. ..in which case we could refer to Windows 10 as "the prime evil" :rolleyes:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Let me see if I've understood your argument:
- We are physical;
- The universe is physical;
- We have a finite size;
- Therefore, the universe must have a finite size.
Is that an accurate summary? Because if it is, I could replace "finite size" with "bumhole", and the argument starts to look rather silly. :laugh:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
No. I'm saying, The Universe is physical and mechanical, therefore finite. I believe that most of your major scientists believe this too. They speak of "almost" infinite but never infinite. I don't believe anyone other than school children actually believe in any physical object that is infinite. Infinite is just a concept, but not reality in the mechanical universe. All physical (non-philosophical conceptual) things have limits. That's all my point is.
-
I'm saying something much more important here. I'm saying that the Universe is physical. If it isn't then we are talking about something that could even be an intelligence and then forget about understanding anything. I'm saying that since the Universe is physical and we are physical then it has a limit. An infinite anything instantly goes beyond physical and instantly becomes metaphysical and we cannot even hope to begin to study it. So, if we are going to believe in a mechanical Universe then it has a limit. If it has a limit then what is on the other sides? That is the real question. If it doesn't have a limit (if it were infinite) then it is not mechanical and physical.
The rule is that measurable quantities cannot be infinite, but an infinite universe doesn't have a proper size let alone a measurable size. There is no contradiction here, an infinite universe can be physical. Whether talking about "the other side" even makes sense depends on the nature of the finiteness
-
No. I'm saying, The Universe is physical and mechanical, therefore finite. I believe that most of your major scientists believe this too. They speak of "almost" infinite but never infinite. I don't believe anyone other than school children actually believe in any physical object that is infinite. Infinite is just a concept, but not reality in the mechanical universe. All physical (non-philosophical conceptual) things have limits. That's all my point is.
That still leaves the question: if the universe has a finite boundary, what is beyond that boundary? Or are you saying that spacetime is a localized concept that has no meaning "outside" of our universe? (Not that there would be an "outside" in that case. Or a "before".)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Quote:
no sign of intelligent life in the observable universe
Including this planet!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
-
The rule is that measurable quantities cannot be infinite, but an infinite universe doesn't have a proper size let alone a measurable size. There is no contradiction here, an infinite universe can be physical. Whether talking about "the other side" even makes sense depends on the nature of the finiteness
Consider this: you have a ruler made of plastic that is infinitely long. So you hold out your ruler and it extends to infinity. What!?! Instantly, we all know that is impossible. It's a physical thing. Only conceptually can something continue to go on forever. Thus, the Universe, which is made up of the same basic elements that the ruler is made up of, cannot possibly be infinite. So, the Universe has to be at least slightly less than infinite. But as soon as it is not infinite then you can reach the edge (end) and ponder what is on the other side.
-
The rule is that measurable quantities cannot be infinite, but an infinite universe doesn't have a proper size let alone a measurable size. There is no contradiction here, an infinite universe can be physical. Whether talking about "the other side" even makes sense depends on the nature of the finiteness
harold aptroot wrote:
The rule is that measurable quantities cannot be infinite, but an infinite universe doesn't have a proper size
This is a very interesting point too, because it feels similar to "a system under observation changes". As if the size of the Universe changes to finite when we find the end or measure it, but is conceptually infinite.
-
Richard Deeming wrote:
Since we can't even see beyond our "tiny" little 91 billion...
And this was actually my entire point. No way to know. Except, most "scientists" and mathematicians believe there is a limit to everything (energy) -- except philosophical debates. :) And if what you say is right then why so much confidence in what Stephen Hawking or Brian Greene or Michio Kaku say? I know as much as they do. :laugh:
Quote:
And if what you say is right then why so much confidence in what Stephen Hawking or Brian Greene or Michio Kaku say? I know as much as they do.
Brian Greene doesn't deserve to be in that list imho. He is to physics, what Dr. Phil is to psychology.
-
Consider this: you have a ruler made of plastic that is infinitely long. So you hold out your ruler and it extends to infinity. What!?! Instantly, we all know that is impossible. It's a physical thing. Only conceptually can something continue to go on forever. Thus, the Universe, which is made up of the same basic elements that the ruler is made up of, cannot possibly be infinite. So, the Universe has to be at least slightly less than infinite. But as soon as it is not infinite then you can reach the edge (end) and ponder what is on the other side.
raddevus wrote:
that is impossible
Would that also apply to singularities?
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment "Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst "I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
-
That still leaves the question: if the universe has a finite boundary, what is beyond that boundary? Or are you saying that spacetime is a localized concept that has no meaning "outside" of our universe? (Not that there would be an "outside" in that case. Or a "before".)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Richard Deeming wrote:
That still leaves the question: if the universe has a finite boundary, what is beyond that boundary?
This too is a point I was attempting to drive toward in a logical manner. Though I freely admit my knowledge of any of this is very, very basic. This was an idea too that at some point studying the physical mechanical universe becomes a study of metaphysical properties (when you reach the end of the physical).
-
Quote:
And if what you say is right then why so much confidence in what Stephen Hawking or Brian Greene or Michio Kaku say? I know as much as they do.
Brian Greene doesn't deserve to be in that list imho. He is to physics, what Dr. Phil is to psychology.
-
Consider this: you have a ruler made of plastic that is infinitely long. So you hold out your ruler and it extends to infinity. What!?! Instantly, we all know that is impossible. It's a physical thing. Only conceptually can something continue to go on forever. Thus, the Universe, which is made up of the same basic elements that the ruler is made up of, cannot possibly be infinite. So, the Universe has to be at least slightly less than infinite. But as soon as it is not infinite then you can reach the edge (end) and ponder what is on the other side.
