It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

Infinity a big mistake ?

page: 5
0
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 12:17 PM

Originally posted by looofo
The solutions have not to be complex.
One solution is to tell to everybody to move from their room (number n) to the next room (n+1) so to free the first room (n=1). Simple.

You got it. I was talking about variations in the problem not the solution that tends to get complex.

Say the hotel clerk is about to hand over the keys to room #1 when an infinite number of cars each with an infinite number of people drop in. They all want a room. There's more than one way to do this. Can you name one of the solutions?

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 04:04 PM
Wait a minute...

the guests (i) are told to move to the rooms (2i+1), so that all the rooms with even number get freed.
Next the passengers (i) from buses (j) are told to go to the rooms with number (2^(i+1))*( 2j+1).

I am not a genius, I read this in a magazine with 90 pages on infinity.

So infinity must exist! But..if I multiply infinity by 2, how much I get

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:30 PM

Originally posted by looofo
Wait a minute...

the guests (i) are told to move to the rooms (2i+1), so that all the rooms with even number get freed.
Next the passengers (i) from buses (j) are told to go to the rooms with number (2^(i+1))*( 2j+1).

Good one! I was thinking in similar terms.
I'd free up the odd rooms instead by moving everyone to their respective room #'s multiplied by 2. Room 2 moves to 4... room 3 moves to 6 and so on.

Now we have infinite cars(i) each with infinite people. Simply put the people from the first car(i=1) in rooms j1^n ( n=1, 2, 3..), people from the second car(i=2) in rooms j2^n(n=1, 2, 3..) and so on. j here will be the succesive primes (3, 5, 7, 11 ...)

I read this in a magazine with 90 pages on infinity.

Last time I read a book like that it gave me a pounding headache.

But..if I multiply infinity by 2, how much I get

You're thinking in finite terms again. Think of infinity as a universal set that contains everything...doubling it will not give you a set bigger than the universal set. Same thing with halfing it.. The cardinality of its subset will always equal the cardinality of the universal set.

I'm trying to find a linky to this website where this is explained. Rarr...

[edit on 15-2-2006 by I_s_i_s]

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:38 PM
We have to ask how was the universe made from nothing if nothing is an absolute. If God is beyond this 3D universe in an environment one that is eternity that can create something out of it. It’s either nothing or something. And I’m choosing a something as my witness of principle.

We should not even be here from nothing not even a lifeless rock. Its two principles 1 to exist or 0 never existed. If something did exist before the universe in a number of infinite possibilities and laws of probability then it’s possible for they’re to be a God too. And even if the element of creation was God it does not mean it has to go back to who created God if he is almighty. It means it supersedes this question its like a fractal its never ending every shape repeats it self which allows GOD to know everything as the nature of the Holy Spirit does. But this is my theory and all equations that say its possible we came from nothing all add to the fact you need something to start it off with. There could be other dimensions too, so what? It’s also a number when you say ‘other’ it takes more than one second of time to say it. It’s possible to be out side time? Yes our understanding of it means beyond our reality time frame. Which only leads to think maybe what is out there which is beyond our time frame environment has a never-ending possibility of existence, which cannot be measured to with an ending or beginning and hence God can exist by correcting all other outcomes or using them as a personal mathematical tool to recreate them, which in a way he is by that nature of mind anyway. Limitless.

Is Pi infinite?
If you go the other way to infinity from the big bang to the future you still have an infinite possibility of anything ocurring including creating a God. Who can just link up with the beginning God who started it all off any way. We can not put an end to Pi because its ouside this universe's relm. Like God it's a circle it has no start it has no end. Alpha and Omega as the Bible puts it. Okay no one will agree with me on this post but I thought it might help.

[edit on 15-2-2006 by The time lord]

[edit on 15-2-2006 by The time lord]

posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 07:44 AM
The notion of infinity does mean a consciousness could have formed instead of a universe. Even a total atheistic quantum mechanic has to believe this.

Something from nothing? Impossible

Always existed? Impossible

All three options are as unlikely as each other.

posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 08:01 AM

Originally posted by albie
Always existed? Impossible

And why is that impossible if I may ask?

posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 08:13 AM
You mean it isn't obvious?

It's basic logic, for a start.

Infinite time stretching into the past? Can't see any flaws in that idea?

Excuse my tone, but I've been explaining this to Produkt for days.

Infinity is not quantifiable. Time, or the passage of events, would have to be quantifiable. Measurable. Or it would defy the laws of basic reality, logic.

Infinity is not real.

Please don't give me mathematical equations to show it does. Mathematical infinity is not the same thing as physical infinity.

posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 08:19 AM

Originally posted by I_s_i_s
I'm trying to find a linky to this website where this is explained. Rarr...

The thought experiment is called "Hilbert's hotel" and a brief discussion of it can be found here: diveintomark.org...

Although not exhaustive, that article mentions some of the other associated ideas with infinities and one of the problems with the Hotel... as when an infinite number of Infinity tour busses (each carrying an infinite number of tourists) show up at the Hlibert Hotel.

posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 08:22 AM

Originally posted by Byrd

The thought experiment is called "Hilbert's hotel" and a brief discussion of it can be found here: diveintomark.org...

posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 08:44 AM
I'm sorry I didnt get a chance to read the earlier pages...

Originally posted by albie
Infinite time stretching into the past? Can't see any flaws in that idea?

Nope I dont see any flaws.

Infinity is not quantifiable. Time, or the passage of events, would have to be quantifiable. Measurable. Or it would defy the laws of basic reality, logic.

The reason time is quantifiable is because its a finite measure created by us to give meaning to events. Infinity and the laws of logic are not mutually exclusive.

Mathematical infinity is not the same thing as physical infinity.

But we have no choice but to comprehend Infinity through mathematics since there is no such thing as physical infinity, atleast as far as limits of our grasp goes.

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 06:10 AM
Ah, the old 'we can't grasp it' chestnut.

I would love to know where you got that idea from in the first place. Such puzzles as this hotel thing?

You see, you've been lead astray.

The hotel would never be built, you see. It certainly wouldn't be infinite, as infinity is not a number. If something physical is infinite it would have no measurement, hence not be a thing at all.

Space can be infinite, because space is an absence of something. Time can be infinite (stretching forward) because it is just a notion.

Cement cannot be infinite because it is something, hence it can be weighed. Only something that can't be weighed in the first place can be infinite.

I just know this isn't going to change your perceptions.

You either get it or you don't.

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 06:32 AM
Sure ya have albie.

Rather pathetic explanations. How can one believe on thing existed in nothingness but not believe that perhaps there never was an absolute nothingness. Where did god come from if religous folk don't accept something from nothing or perhaps something just always was? It's a contradiction.

Trace a circle around a ball. Now imagine neither you nor the ball are going to die out. Imagine your going to keep existing in the physical form you are now. Define howto determine you tracing your finger around that ball isn't a concept of infinity. I know this has been brought up before... Infinity is a hard concept to grasp. Your last post just shows that.

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 07:25 AM
Produkt i told you describe to me nothing?
Nothing is a word, how silly for us to use a word for "nothing"right?
A word describeing something it's something.
I see even nothing has a meaning.
This nothing is black it's not white but it's diferent because it's not white, so when someting is diferent it's something.
We might not get it in our little heads we do use a small amount of it and when we see something strange we say now that's "wierrd", another word for describeing something we are not used to.
When one walks in to nothing he moves away from "something"that is right we can calculate the distance point.
Let's say i am at the limit of the universe and i keep going on, from that point of the departure i can calculate how far i have gone in to nothing, calculateing from a point I left to the point I am, there is nothing but i'm still going and moving away from the point I left, and i can gain infinite distance in nothing i just keep on going from the point i left and i''l be gaining distance, it's dark but it's something, it's infinite. Just like with numbers keep counting and tell me when you have reached the end of numbers has we know it.

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 07:46 AM
I always imagined absolute nothingness would indicate an area of space completely devoid of anything. No air, no light, no matter, no interactions at the quantum level, or anything below that.

But then again, absolute nothing is something we defined, not experienced. There's no indication's that this universe was born ni absolute nothingness. We've never even SEEN absolute nothingness. We can't even create an absolute nothingness is this universe. So why do we think the universe came from absolute nothingness when we have no proof that there actually exist's an absolute nothingness?

We can test for infinity... to a point. You can keep counting, alway's adding one extra number. Never ending. Mathmatical infinity. You can trace a line across the surface of a sphere, always making one extra revolution around that sphere. Never ending. Physical infinity.

But what of absolute nothingness? We have no indication within this universe that it exist's. No indication that this universe was born from absolute nothingness. We can accept a god supposedly live's in this absolute nothingness, but we can't accept that perhaps absolute nothingness doesn't exist?

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 09:06 AM
Okay here is a dilema , it's about the creation of the universe, regarding ininity.
I can get 2 or 3 or 4.

i can do 1+1 and get 2
or 1+1+1+1+infinite and get any number i like.

The question is how do I obtain 1?
I mean 1 just like I obtain 2 , 3 ,4 ,5
numbers are theresult of other numbers but how do I get 1?
Can I obtain 1 from zero?no
How do you obtain 1 from another number? i'mnot talking about substractions of biger numbers because they are obtained from 1.
So how do we get 1 in the first place.
Any one?

It means 1 is already present right? we cant get 1 from anything
0+0+0+0 nope we dont get it

1 is really uniqe can it be god him self?
The big question that i want to put is
oes ininity start from 0 or 1?
I have no idea so any ideas?
The origin of number 1 where does 1 come from?

I guess that's why our phisic laws crash in the black hole.
we base them on 1 from 1 comes all, funny how we build laws not knowing
origins of where it came from.
" built this law but i cant remember where it came from" it's sort of that.

[edit on 18-2-2006 by pepsi78]

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 09:36 AM
'm not talking about getting something from nothing. I'm not talking about an absolute nothingness before the big bang. We have no evidence that an absolute nothingness can even exist! We can never produce an absolute nothingness in this universe. Quantum physics forbids such a silly notion as absolute nothingness. Not even the space in between galaxies or super clusters of galaxies is composed of absolute nothingness. The vaccuum of space outside our universe, another prime example that absolute nothingess doesn't exist. WE defined absolute nothingness.

Can anyone show me absolute nothingness? Can anyone show me that absolute nothingess existed before the univserse? Can anyone show me how it's possible for god to exist in absolute nothingness, but impossible for something to just always have been there?

I understand what your saying pepsi. Mathematical infinity can start from 0 going back -n infinity and going + infinity. You can't keep counting in either direction, always adding one extra zero at the end. There is no potential end to how many zero's you can add onto the end of a number.

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 09:47 AM
I was trying to explain to you that even nothing is something.
Zero for that matter does not exist.
If we can solve number 1 we can solve anithing that includes infinity.
So infinity is something and nothing is something because zero can not exist.
From the begining there was 1, 1 is sure not zero so 1 can develope infinity while 0 can not.
1 is a creative force it develops ininite posibilities.
The other thread with what hapens wehn you die.
If the thread sounded like why do we die the answer would be "because we are boren"
So the reason we die is that, if we can figure out why we are boren we can figure out why we die.
What go's beiond that cant be 0, there is no such thing as zero

posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 04:18 AM
Pepsi

what about 1 = 0.5 + 0.5

or 1 = 0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 + 0.2 = 0.2*5

or smaller steps:

1 = 0.01*100 = 0.001*1000

or infinite series of :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . n=infinity
1 = lim(d->0) SUM | ( d )
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . n=0

==> 1 = lim(d->0) lim(n->infinity) [ d * n ]

in other form:

1 = d + d + d + d + ................ , where d goes to nothingness

which means 1 is the sum of infinite number of infinitely small elements.

posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 08:23 AM
hmmm...my post was overlooked, so let me say it again:

the reason it seems that 1 = 0 is because in the 2nd sum, we add 1!

Here is the first sum:

S = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1....

Here is the second sum:

S = 1 -1 + 1 - 1 + 1....

The 1 in bold above is the one that was erroneously added to the sum, causing 1 = 0. Since -1 + 1 equals 1 - 1, the extra 1 is what causes the problem.

posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 10:06 AM
The problem is that you can't define 1 out of any other number. In math you just have to assume that 1 is given. From the number 1 you can then construct every other natural number 2,3,4... and so on by induction. Given the natural numbers you can construct the rationels, reals, complex numbers etc. But the number 1 is not constructable. It's just something you have to take for granted in math that it exists... Everything in math is based on that.

[edit on 19-2-2006 by zike]

new topics

top topics

0