Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 82

Thread: Infinite

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Yes, t=0 is a definite bridge-wizard that says "You Shall Not Pass!"
    I can recommend Carlo Rovelli on that. T= 0 is not a useful concept, even for a bridge wizard. But is it granular to avoid zeros?
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    20,431
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Look we have scientific evidence that points back to the big bang, lots of consistent evidence.
    The big bang evidence is about how the universe developed, not how it (or if it) began.

    Other versions of creation have no evidence at all. The evidence can be examined by anyone, in the sense of peer reviewed papers. But the infinity point is that the story ends back there at a singularity.
    We donít know that, we can only say the universe was very dense and hot about 13.8 billion years ago.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,866
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    I can recommend Carlo Rovelli on that. T= 0 is not a useful concept, even for a bridge wizard. But is it granular to avoid zeros?
    t=0 marks the furthest back we have evidence of, it's where we hit the wall. So yes, it's a useful concept even if it's not the "beginning of the Universe". It's the limit of our observational horizon.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,185
    Maybe use the Planck Time as our limit?
    SHARKS (crossed out) MONGEESE (sic) WITH FRICKIN' LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    Maybe use the Planck Time as our limit?
    That is at least consistent. Even if it turns out to be not a constant, it avoids that zero. So if you divide by it as a rate, you get a big number but not infinity.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,717
    Something that presents a paradox in my mind is to consider a universe that had ( T=0 ) beginning but then extends for infinity into the future. If you flip this argument on its head and consider looking back from "infinitely" far in the future, then the timeline line would appear to extend infinitely back into the past thus no beginning.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,866
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmocrazy View Post
    Something that presents a paradox in my mind is to consider a universe that had ( T=0 ) beginning but then extends for infinity into the future. If you flip this argument on its head and consider looking back from "infinitely" far in the future, then the timeline line would appear to extend infinitely back into the past thus no beginning.
    How could you look back from infinite anything? If it takes time to reach that point, it's finite by definition. Any observing being has a beginning, middle, end. It's like C, mass can approach it but never reach it.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmocrazy View Post
    Something that presents a paradox in my mind is to consider a universe that had ( T=0 ) beginning but then extends for infinity into the future. If you flip this argument on its head and consider looking back from "infinitely" far in the future, then the timeline line would appear to extend infinitely back into the past thus no beginning.
    Quite so, universe for ever, albeit changing such as from energy to matter or even information to energy, but beginnings and endings are uncomfortable for me. I can see the symmetery of matter antimatter, energy, antienergy all adding to zero, but while symmetrical it doeas not sit easy. But there is no rule that the universe has be logical or rational. (Unless there is such a rule from beyond infinity) tongue in cheek emoji.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,866
    So, a point is finite, a line can be finite or infinite. A finite line always has two endpoints. A line that's infinite in two directions has no endpoints. A line might be infinite in one direction, with only one endpoint.

    I don't really see why that's impossible.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    20,431
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmocrazy View Post
    Something that presents a paradox in my mind is to consider a universe that had ( T=0 ) beginning but then extends for infinity into the future. If you flip this argument on its head and consider looking back from "infinitely" far in the future, then the timeline line would appear to extend infinitely back into the past thus no beginning.
    Just as a note, I donít take predictions about the far future of the universe too seriously because theyíve changed too many times as new evidence has come in, but a couple of thoughts: A common prediction is that the universe will get so cold that essentially nothing further can happen. Would it then even make sense to argue time continues passing? Maybe that could be called the end of the universe. On the other hand there is the notion that a rare but inevitable over extreme time event could start up a universe again making for a type of cyclic universe.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    How could you look back from infinite anything? If it takes time to reach that point, it's finite by definition. Any observing being has a beginning, middle, end. It's like C, mass can approach it but never reach it.
    Absolutely, but do you agree that if the universe extends for infinity then theoretically there should be a point infinitely far away? But really there can never be such a point, since for every point along the journey there is a finite distance from the beginning and an infinite distance ahead. My point was rather to highlight paradoxes that occur when considering infinity from certain perspectives.

    The logical answer and definition is what you state

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,717
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Quite so, universe for ever, albeit changing such as from energy to matter or even information to energy, but beginnings and endings are uncomfortable for me. I can see the symmetery of matter antimatter, energy, antienergy all adding to zero, but while symmetrical it doeas not sit easy. But there is no rule that the universe has be logical or rational. (Unless there is such a rule from beyond infinity) tongue in cheek emoji.
    I think this point is quite relevant when discussing what may appear absurdities (my bold) we look for logic and rationality using science and math and overall we do a very good job. The very notion that logic and rationality may not be fundamental to the universe doesn't sit easy with me at all. But maybe because that's the way I'm wired, I live my life using logic and rationality. Where as my partner is the polar opposite, she see's things in more of a disordered, illogical, abstract way.
    Last edited by cosmocrazy; 2021-Jun-15 at 08:11 AM.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Just as a note, I don’t take predictions about the far future of the universe too seriously because they’ve changed too many times as new evidence has come in, but a couple of thoughts: A common prediction is that the universe will get so cold that essentially nothing further can happen. Would it then even make sense to argue time continues passing? Maybe that could be called the end of the universe. On the other hand there is the notion that a rare but inevitable over extreme time event could start up a universe again making for a type of cyclic universe.
    Yes, and this is somewhat similar to the idea Roger Penrose suggests in that, once the universe expands beyond the point where size becomes undefinably then the universe has no idea how big it is therefore could essentially "reset" to form another big bang.

    And this was sort of my point in my post #36 at some event infinitely far into the distance. This seems illogical to imagine, as Noclevername stated, logically, for every point along an infinite line that has a beginning there is a finite distance from the that beginning. But going back to what Roger suggests T=0 at the big bang and as the universe expands forever (T=0) = (T=~) in all directions.
    Last edited by cosmocrazy; 2021-Jun-15 at 08:12 AM.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,866
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmocrazy View Post
    Absolutely, but do you agree that if the universe extends for infinity then theoretically there should be a point infinitely far away?
    Since a point is finite, I think there can't be "a point infinitely far away". It's like saying "If time is infinite when is the last moment"? By definition it won't have one.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Since a point is finite, I think there can't be "a point infinitely far away". It's like saying "If time is infinite when is the last moment"? By definition it won't have one.
    Actually a mathematical point is infinitely small and you could have in (x,y) , (inf,inf) but it has no practical meaning just as you can have inf ^ inf or an infinite set within a larger infinite set. All maths for manipulating equations. There can be an infinity of numbers between zero and one. But as has been said, if you put practical constraint you have a smallest step or planck length. Like those parallel lines of the infinite railway track, if you travel them they never meet. Infinity is a limit in a maths model.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  16. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,866
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Infinity is a limit in a maths model.
    I was imagining physical distance. Hence "far away".

    Of course an infinite line requires infinite space to exist in. So if the Universe turns out to be finite in spacetime, there'd be no infinite lines anyway.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  17. #47
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,185
    Yes, and this is somewhat similar to the idea Roger Penrose suggests in that, once the universe expands beyond the point where size becomes undefinably then the universe has no idea how big it is therefore could essentially "reset" to form another big bang.

    cosmocrazy, how "big" would that be? You can use the terms in googology ( https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Googology_Wiki ) to define numbers ad infinitum. The universe becoming undefinably large could never happen
    SHARKS (crossed out) MONGEESE (sic) WITH FRICKIN' LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

  18. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    The universe becoming undefinably large could never happen
    And why not...?
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  19. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    Yes, and this is somewhat similar to the idea Roger Penrose suggests in that, once the universe expands beyond the point where size becomes undefinably then the universe has no idea how big it is therefore could essentially "reset" to form another big bang.

    cosmocrazy, how "big" would that be? You can use the terms in googology ( https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Googology_Wiki ) to define numbers ad infinitum. The universe becoming undefinably large could never happen
    Ha! Never is another infinitely long time. And “undefinable” is another paradox set of everything that cannot be defined. We are stuck with big or bigger than big. I guess bigness can go infinite. I mean really big. They say possible permutations of synapse connections in a human brain exceeds the number of stars, or is it atoms? Anyway a big number but is it infinite? How long can we wait while counting? Are all snowflakes unique or only while finite?
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  20. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    I was imagining physical distance. Hence "far away".

    Of course an infinite line requires infinite space to exist in. So if the Universe turns out to be finite in spacetime, there'd be no infinite lines anyway.
    Lines are in spacetime, so I think they can be infinite in a finite universe. Like there can be infinite stories in a finite ink printed book. In theory if not in practice.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  21. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    15,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Since a point is finite, I think there can't be "a point infinitely far away". It's like saying "If time is infinite when is the last moment"? By definition it won't have one.
    I may be misunderstanding. But isnít the question about the distance between two points? The distance between two points is a line, and a line can be infinitely long, so Iím not sure what the size of the point has to do with it. When you talk about the distance arenít you referring to the line between the two points?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  22. #52
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    I may be misunderstanding. But isn’t the question about the distance between two points? The distance between two points is a line, and a line can be infinitely long, so I’m not sure what the size of the point has to do with it. When you talk about the distance aren’t you referring to the line between the two points?
    A point is a location. Hence, relationships between points are always finite. There cannot be a point "infinitely far away", in space or time. A point always has a distance. The observer analogy thus had no meaning; You cannot look back from "infinitely far", only from "too far to see the beginning", which is just an illusion of infinity. Which is probably all we're ever going to know about the status of the real Universe as far as infinity in space or time.

    There's no way to observe outside our lightspeed bubble. If or when the Universe ends there's no observers to know anything. As long as the Universe goes on, we can't say it's never going to end, just that it hasn't yet. There's no way to test it.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  23. #53
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    15,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    A point is a location. Hence, relationships between points are always finite. There cannot be a point "infinitely far away", in space or time. A point always has a distance. The observer analogy thus had no meaning; You cannot look back from "infinitely far", only from "too far to see the beginning", which is just an illusion of infinity. Which is probably all we're ever going to know about the status of the real Universe as far as infinity in space or time.

    There's no way to observe outside our lightspeed bubble. If or when the Universe ends there's no observers to know anything. As long as the Universe goes on, we can't say it's never going to end, just that it hasn't yet. There's no way to test it.
    Yes, that makes sense. You can have a point at one end of a line, but if the line extends infinitely in the other direction you couldn't have a point at the other end, kind of by definition I guess.
    As above, so below

  24. #54
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    Yes, that makes sense. You can have a point at one end of a line, but if the line extends infinitely in the other direction you couldn't have a point at the other end, kind of by definition I guess.
    Well there can be an infinity of lines between two finite points, as in fields, for example.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  25. #55
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Since a point is finite, I think there can't be "a point infinitely far away". It's like saying "If time is infinite when is the last moment"? By definition it won't have one.
    I didn't originally define it as a point infinitely far away. I said "infinitely far in the future", though I did say "looking back from" which by definition could be considered a point.

  26. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    cosmocrazy, how "big" would that be? You can use the terms in googology ( https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Googology_Wiki ) to define numbers ad infinitum. The universe becoming undefinably large could never happen
    Maybe it would be when everything that remains in space is so far apart its no longer causally connected. But I don't claim to fully understand Roger's hypothesis, so this is just a guess.

  27. #57
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmocrazy View Post
    I didn't originally define it as a point infinitely far away. I said "infinitely far in the future", though I did say "looking back from" which by definition could be considered a point.
    Infinitely far in the future has two assumptions, one that the future has meaning apart from our perception and two, that an infinite future means anything at all except as a limit to a model. It also has limits about light speed, at one reading infinitely far in the future must be very dark since no light has arrived. Or if you accept you can only mean a future at light speed, then have you reached the point at which you observe the big bang? Not really an infinity then?
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  28. #58
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmocrazy View Post
    Maybe it would be when everything that remains in space is so far apart its no longer causally connected. But I don't claim to fully understand Roger's hypothesis, so this is just a guess.
    Big assumption there, the limit of causality and whether causality is more than an illusion. Tricky things these infinities.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  29. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    15,011
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Well there can be an infinity of lines between two finite points, as in fields, for example.
    I was going to mention that, but didn't, because it's true actually that even a line with a finite length can be divided into infinite segments, but with that we are sort of getting into the territory of the paradoxes attributed to Of Elea.
    As above, so below

  30. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,056
    The ancient greeks realised that a hot cup of tea, if heat could be infinitely divided, would never reach room temperature, yet it does. They realised that there must be finite quanta and when the last one goes, the tea is cold. Impressive reasoning, but they made time to think about those things.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •