Contemplating infinity...

[Dolemite]

Originally posted by Captain Vegetable
There are times when I've wished man's mind wasn't so damned liniar in the way it understands time. Then, maybe, we'd have some kind of perspective.

It's just what we're used to. Everything we know of is finite, thus, we think in those terms. As Yoda once said, you must unlearn what you have learned. I have no clue as to how to do that, but...

[Mr_Furious]

I believe in the concept of "nothing" more than the concept of "infinity".

[Hero]

some people say time is a human construct. Time really doesn't 'exist' - only repeating patterns, growths, and decompositions of matter. Time is a way for us to set value on those passages; a whole rotation of the Earth becomes a day, but for the Earth, it's just a perset pattern doomed to repetition until some varible that affects its rotation changes. There is no time in that.

Gah. Now my head hurts.

[youandwhosearmy]

I guess I'm going to go against the majority here and say that the universe is definately a finite construct. A lot of scientists now believe that the universe is expanding at such a rate that there is not enough gravity, (including dark matter), for it to collapse back in on itself. That does not make the universe infinite however, because what is it after all light and matter disipate and burn out after a trillion or so years?

Nothing.

All evidence points to the idea that the universe came from something no bigger than a grapefruit, and therefore unless this spark, or compound of matter was infinite, the universe is held to the rules of its own birth, even as it continues to expand with no hope of collasping back on itself.

Nothing is forever. The universe will eventually burn out and become nothing,

so I say again.

Nothing is forever

[Hero]

such a ray of sunshine ^_^

but yeah, if all things came from the size of a grapefruit (I won't even try talking about what would cause that grapefruit to explode ^^), then that means there was a finite definition in the beginning, and finite material can't transform into infinite material. At least I don't think so.

Everything as infinity would mean that there always was what there is, and that was infinite to begin, and continues to be so.

[youandwhosearmy]

But thats where this comes into question. I believe the universe is finite simply because the stars will die, the matter will be sucked into nothingness, and dark matter (while technically matter) still does not have the distincion of being tangible in anyway we can see or where it would positvely affect the universe.

What is here now, will not be here in the future. You can trust to that because the universe is pulling away from itself, and eventually things will be far enough away where they no longer have relevence on other objects in the universe.

[Rich]

I always think about falling into a never ending hole..that'd be cool.

[Will]

Veering a bit off subject, I've always been facinated with Black holes, I've always wanted to see what was inside them after it sucks in whatever is trapped in there. Is it just a vacuum pocket of space or is it a rift between dimensions? Or is it both? Is the hole inside of it an infinite loop leading to a network of other black holes?

Anyway back to topic, I don't really WANT to think about the 'infinite' concept until my head explodes but it is interesting to talk about.

[Tracer]

Originally posted by Rhydant
i dont believe in the concept of infinity. it just doesnt seem logical to me. everything has to stop sometime. sure, there are alot of stars in the galaxy, but at any one point in time there must be a set number of them.

Mathematically, Infinity exists whether you like it or not. It's like saying you don't belive in zero.

ºTracer

[rezo]

I typed up something in here earlier, but my computer decided to turn itself off when I nearly finished it.

Anyways

mean, we all assume that the universe is infinite, but can a human being truly grasp the concept of something that never ends? It's easy to say, "woah, dude, that goes on forever" but it's another thing altogether to actually comprehend that.

No, its not another thing to actually comprehend that. "dude, that goes on forever" is all you need to know as far as understanding something being infinite. I think people simply like the idea of thinking about infinity as a high incomprehensible concept.

this is a line

---------------> that thing at the end signifies that it goes on forever.


<--------------> It goes on forever in both directions!


º--------------º A limited line.

As for having a visual image of what an infinite amount of something would look like in my head,If you understand infinite, you would realize that creating such an image would be impossible, and wouldn't even bother to try. See, that's why we have the " > " at the end of a line instead of coming up with an infinite amount of time and materials to create the infinite line.



I like Mr. Furious's comment about believing in "nothing". We can understand the concept of non-existence -and this here is for Dolemite- even though everything we interact with exists.Just like we can understand the concept of infinite while only witnessing limited things directly.

But back to what Mr. Furious said. If you recognize "nothing" as "not existing" (as opposed to a substantial emptiness) then the question of "what is outside of the universe?" is solved. Nothing.What about what came before the first cause? Nothing. Otherwise the "first cause" wouldn't be the first. Is that nothing infinite? You could rationalize that easily I'm sure, but its like saying "that thing that doesn't exist is infinite".The size of the universe can be derived from its extremities and it would require an infinite amount of expansion in order for the universe to be infinite.The universe can approach an infinite size, but never reach it.If "nothing" is regarded as substantial, then the universe is infinite by default.

There are also the questions of causality brought up."It doesn't seem possible that there was a first day, second, etc"

However, for a set of causal occurences to happen, they must start with a natural base. ie: something that wasn't caused. For fun, you can say "logic comes from an illogical base".

Anyways, it is the only way I can see to resolve the whole, "what came first" question. The fact that something came first means that it existed without an explanation. It did not "come first", it "was first".To search for an explanation or reason why something is natural is impossible, as the explanation does not exist. It merely is.

Let's assume time is a loop.The end is the beginning and really, any point can be regarded as the end or the beginning since they're on a circle. While such a conclusion solves the question of "what was the first cause" as it creates a system where everything exists with a cause and effect, it does not deal with the question of how such a system can be. Is there a reason that time is looped? Some greater property that time is derived from? And how does that exist as it does? You can see the series of questions I'm creating here right? Its functionally the same as the "what was before the first cause" pattern, just dealing with other things as causality has been resolved completely. No matter which way you look at it, a natural base is required for causality to exist.Whatever the base is, is what our world, matter , time, logic, etc are derived from.

But, more fun with time! Let's say it loops, once again.Imagine the circle, and put a line through it. At every position except for the limits it should cross two points on the "time circle". Right? Now, because time is looping towards infinite,All of the matter will be continually compounding itself as it goes around the circle.

Let's say the loop is 5 years. So , " at the beginning" there was a guy that was 0 yrs old. After it completes its first loop,he'll be 5, however, the 0 yr old baby will be there to greet the 5 yr old as well, and in fact, the 5 yr old was there when the baby started its path. And the 10 yr old version,and the 15 yr old version, and so on. All existing at the same time. Now, because of all of these different versions existing at the same time, the ages of the person represented in this loop would be infinite. Along with the 20 yr old version, you'd have the 5 * 10^1000 yr old flecks of matter that he used to be composed of, and, in fact, every other possible age. There would be no "oldest" version, as the would be infinite,

Now, remember what I said earlier about putting a line through the loop.Since they all exist at the same time, there isn't really a reason to regard it as a loop at all.The sum of that entire system can be found in a single 5 year period. Pick any complete loop - from 0 to 0 , or from 1 to 1, and so one - and divide it into sections, with the 0 yr as the low value, and the limit of the 5th year as the high point(you don't use the 5th yr point. as the high point, because it equals the 0 yr point.) In between these two points you have all of the time between the high and low points.This infinitely looping system can then be regarded as a single limited set of states in a 5 yr. period.


umm... see, I thought that the fact that I could take the infinitely looping system and turn it into a limited set of states was interesting. Also, in each state of the 5 yr block, you would have an infinite amount of people and their matter,and this infinite amount could be considered as

a. natural (you ignore the previous looping system and recognize the 0 pt. as the "beginning")

b. derived from a limited source(That baby that repeatedly looped past himself in the looping system. The relative timeline of said child is straight and had to actually develop into all of the other versions, even if the loop causes these developments to exist concurrently to what it is developed from)



yeah. hope I got everything right in there and that if I did it made sense.


edit- the 0 yr old baby was caused by something that happened "later" in the loop. I wasn't meaning to imply that there was an absolute beginning for the loop that the child existed in, as that couldn't be. The end causes the beginning and so forth.I simply meant that the child would age infinite and that all of the forms it took in aging would exist concurrently within the 5 yr period.