When does a number become so large it's infinite?

Infinity is never included in the set for the limits of an integral.

The non-existence of infinity disproves the existence of an infinite god. It doesn't disprove the existence of every concept of god, just the infinite ones, and if god is not infinite, that means there can be more than one.

The last significant figure of pi is undefined, so is an infinite god.
Since 0.999...=1, the last significant figure of 0.999... is undefined, not 9.

Also, the best explanation I know is this:

If you type TAN(PI/2) into your calculator, it returns an error, but it is not infinity, it is undefined. It means that when you rotate a line through 90 degrees, knowing the tangent is not enough to determine the length of the line, the line does not suddenly become infinite at 90 degrees.

Since this is skunkworks stompf, your theory is an interesting one to say the least. But as posted by numerous members answers to your mathematical theories, its just not feasible.

Unfortunately your vision was just that, a vision of preposterous proportions. But a good theory to say the least. Thats the greatness of this board. People have theories and others show them the error in their thinking. Ive been proven differently in lots of things by the great membership here. Keep up the good thinking stompf. Your mind is expanding so it seems.

Infinity is the number 8 tipped on its side??

Step on an ant how do you feel?

Kill a chicken for food how do you feel?

Kill a human how do you feel?

Insignificance is the answer, our Brains "can't cope" with the Maths etc....

The answers will be revealed when we are gone or when the end comes!

Space is infinite.

"Tell me that you'll open your eyes"?

Tom

Originally posted by Columbus
Infinity is never included in the set for the limits of an integral.

It's been a long, long time since I took Calculus, but I'm sure there are functions that you can find an area or volumes for functions that range to infinity -- like a hyperbolic cone or something.

[edit on 4/27/2007 by djohnsto77]

Originally posted by djohnsto77
It's been a long, long time since I took Calculus, but I'm sure there are functions that you can find an area or volumes for functions that range to infinity -- like a hyperbolic cone or something.

The limits are as x (or whatever) approaches infinity or negative infinity.

If the result of any function is "infinity" (an error to your calculator), it means the function has no value at that range, meaning it either doesn't exist, or it is indeterminate, meaning it is a non-infinite real number but you don't have enough data to determine it. TAN(PI/2) is an example of this.

Bottom line, how would you enter infinity into your calculator to evaluate a function at infinity? If you put 1/0 you get an error and can't continue.

I don't remember exactly the nomenclature, but I'm sure that there are cone-like trumpet shapes that are infinitely deep yet still have a finite volume.

[edit on 4/29/2007 by djohnsto77]

Infinity is a well-recognized and understood concept, but I don't see how that in any way proves anything about God. For example, in that zero entered Europe and the western consciousness when the Muslim libraries were taken by the Christians and the books were translated. It was not part of Roman numerals, and zero was a hard sell, most feeling it was not a number, because clearly it was nothing. Since adopting the Hindu-Arabic number system, western science was able to do more than just count. Now they could calculate Pi, etc. So, why not say that proves that Allah is real?
Christians adopted their number system, which was superior.
On a similar note, is their a difference between .9 repeater and one?
If so what is it?
What does that prove?

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Infinity is a well-recognized and understood concept, but I don't see how that in any way proves anything about God. ... On a similar note, is their a difference between .9 repeater and one?
If so what is it?
What does that prove?

It proves that god cannot be infinite. If god isn't infinite, there can be more than one, or greater gods, and so on. It goes to show that god is a purely defined concept, rather since people have been chipping away at god, there's not much left to believe in. People still find reason to believe, they just don't know what they believe in, because it sure isn't an infinite immortal single god.

As for the 0.999..., it shows that the final, infiniteth decimal place does not exist. If it did, then 0.999... would not equal 1, which it does. The point being infinity doesn't exist.

But this only matters if you believe god is infinite, and not much of a god isn't. God is pretty much toast.

If (and definately if) I understand your argument, Columbus; it goes something like this:

God = Infinity
Infinity = negative infinity (or infinitely undefined)
therefore God = negative infinity (as defined by a calculator)
therfore God does not equal infinity

Correct?

If so then you have to use the concept of infinity to disprove the existence of God (who in this case is defined simply as a mathematical conception of infinity - a whole other issue) since if infinity did not exist then there could not be such a thing as an infinitely undefined number.

However, I rather like the idea of an infinitely undefined God, inasmuch as I can approach the traditional idea of a god at all. I much prefer the elusive concept of the Tao, which by definition almost is undefined. Almost all mystics have held that "God" is undefineable - just from an historical perspective. If there is a god then i certainly dont think it is perfect, or even would want to be. Infinitely undefineable is a sweet way to think about it. (I dont know if you would be interested but you might want to look up Nicolas of Cusa; who dealt with a lot of similar questions in a geometrical kind of way - resolving square circles and the like throught the use of the infinite - He said that the infinite is everywhere bounded by a wall of paradox.)

Originally posted by liquidself
However, I rather like the idea of an infinitely undefined God, inasmuch as I can approach the traditional idea of a god at all. I much prefer the elusive concept of the Tao, which by definition almost is undefined. Almost all mystics have held that "God" is undefineable

Just to add some icing to this answer, this particular path that liquidself outlined is called the via negativa, and it's theology is called negative theology. Beside Nicholas you have Pseudo-Dionysis, Meister Eckart, John of the Cross.

This vision has taken a while for me to understand. I started this thread as I was having the vision, so it was clear to me. But the point of it has eluded me until now.
God wants us to understand that He is not infinite. He is 1. An individual. He feels sadness, anger, love, jealousy. His power is what we would consider infinite, is considered God's realm to Him. God lives by the rules He set for the universe. Free will is God's gift. He gives it to us to use at our discretion, hoping that we use it wisely.
We are not using our free will wisely. God is sending the message that his patience has come to an end.

Originally posted by liquidself
God = Infinity

Infinity is a quantifier. Many people claim god is infinite but don't qualify it. You could say god has infinite knowledge (all-knowing, omniscient), infinite strength (almighty, all-powerful, omnipotent), or infinite size (omnipresent). I make no such claims, only point out that they are meaningless.

Infinity = negative infinity (or infinitely undefined)

This is false, but by the way, negative infinity does not cancel infinity because infinity is not defined. Math with infinities is where a lot of mistakes are made because of presumptuous assumptions.

therefore God = negative infinity (as defined by a calculator)

If god is infinite in the absolute sense, then god can be both infinity and negative infinity. The point is neither infinity nor negative infinity actually exist because they are undefined.

therfore God does not equal infinity

If god exists, he is not infinite.

...you have to use the concept of infinity to disprove the existence of God (who in this case is defined simply as a mathematical conception of infinity - a whole other issue)

The concept of infinity is defined as not existing in reality, therefore if god has this property, by default he does not exist.

Infinity has real meaning, but there is no real thing that is infinite. A jade hotdog has real meaning, but there is no real thing that is a jade hotdog.

an infinitely undefined number.

This is redundant.

Almost all mystics have held that "God" is undefineable - just from an historical perspective.

If you define god, any philosopher can prove that the definition is logically false and therefore unreal. Leaving god undefined is the only way to keep smart people from tearing apart your theology. But if you don't define god, you've got nothing to begin with. Even you don't know what you actually believe in because you haven't described it. The reason is cowardice and willful ignorance.

If there is a god then i certainly dont think it is perfect, or even would want to be.

A whole other discussion about aesthetics.

(I dont know if you would be interested but you might want to look up Nicolas of Cusa; who dealt with a lot of similar questions in a geometrical kind of way - resolving square circles and the like throught the use of the infinite - He said that the infinite is everywhere bounded by a wall of paradox.)

I looked up Nicholas of Cusa, but frankly some of his views are intended to bend definitions to favor the existence of god. The logical paradoxes surrounding infinity are confirmation of its nonexistence. Take the Grand Hotel Paradox as another example.

Originally posted by stompk
God lives by the rules He set for the universe.

This is the Barber Paradox, a logical paradox that proves the nonexistence of god.

Free will is God's gift.

Yet god seems to lack free will, since he can't undo Original Sin, or any of his other "rules" (commandments).

...hoping that we use it wisely. We are not using our free will wisely.

What could possibly go wrong?

God is sending the message that his patience has come to an end.

This implies that we should be using our will towards HIS goals, which is HIS WILL, not ours. What is the point of Free Will if you have to do somebody elses?

I wanted to do this in point form but frankly it became a question of when does a post become so large its infinite

I have to point out that the the little argument I posted there were what I construed your argument to be, not statements taken individualy that I believe. You have set up a staw dog by dissecting the statements individually and attacking them with your conclusions. The argument as a whole was what I understood your argument to be; which as I stated, may have been an incorrect understanding.

quote:The concept of infinity is defined as not existing in reality, therefore if god has this property, by default he does not exist.
Infinity has real meaning, but there is no real thing that is infinite. A jade hotdog has real meaning, but there is no real thing that is a jade hotdog.

It is easy to assert that infinity does not exist, and then draw conclusions from that. Just because mathematicians use infinitities as a way of judging their errors (rightly so) does not necessarily justify an extension into the cosmological realm. Physicists use infinities to cancel one another out and derive results from that. If the extension of the concept of an infinity does not justify the existence of an infinity, then the concept of an completely undefined state will not disprove infinity either. For real irritation here, check out Anselm's god "proof" that the mere existence of the concept of infinity proves god s existence, which doesnt pan for me.

I could easily make you a jade hotdog, because it is potentialy real. It is in the realm of contingent fact. Artists engage in this activity often - perhaps it does exist, and we have no knowlege of it. I do wonder about the assumption that if something is undefined it does not exist. My future is undefined (I hope) yet I exist.

I mention the mystic types because they often accepted the idea of an undefined, non-infinite god. This is not a new concept. For me, it is a more honest approach for someone who takes the god-concept seriously( for me the issue is infinity, not god -which seems like an archaic concept to my lights). I do not believe for a second that they were attempting to evade having logical proofs, for they often were ripped apart, burnt, staked, stoned for precisely their beliefs, for being heretics. These people were anything but cowards. As for not knowing their own beliefs, the sheer volume of material delineating their statements and visions says otherwise. If anything those kinds of beliefs led to advances in the science of the time (see Giordano Bruno).

You are somewhat right about Nicolas bending beliefs towards god, he was after all cardinal i believe, but his system is actually neo-platonic - and it was the concept of infinity that he contemplated. These paradoxes can be seen in an analogous way to zen koans, the contemplation of which leads to enlightenment - the point being that linear thinking is ill equipped to deal with infinity.

quote: If there is a god then i certainly dont think it is perfect, or even would want to be.
A whole other discussion about aesthetics.

- This is not aesthetics - a perfect god is limited by its perfection - there is no where to go beyond perfect. My reading of the Grand Hotel Paradox (thanks for the reference by the way) is that there is no contradictions within the paradox - unless you view it as a static concept - which is not necessary.

I find it extremely difficult to conceive of a universe that is not infinite in some sense. once having existed, either it goes completely towards total heat death and exists as some kind of attenuated radiation, or it blinks out or radiates towards nothingness, in which case the nothingness continues for all time - though it is very difficult to believe that even the residue of space/time would cease to exist - matter is niether created nor destroyed.

Originally posted by liquidself
It is easy to assert that infinity does not exist, and then draw conclusions from that.

It is not merely an assertion. If actual infinity existed there would be logical paradoxes. I believe I've pointed out a few of them, but I'll remind you.

One has to do with proportionality. There is no such thing as a proportion of infinity. This makes it impossible for an omnipotent entity to measure his applied strength or control the location where it is applied.

God could not know about parts of himself. The thing about infinity, is that being undefined implies that even if parts exist and have value, you can't extrapolate what the value is, so God will lose parts of himself.

In fact the universe itself is infinitesimal compared to infinity and it is logically impossible for god to even be able to find it.

Physicists use infinities to cancel one another out and derive results from that.

This is dangerous. Certain operations with infinity don't cancel. This leads to errors which I mentioned. Infinity does not refer to a specific value, therefore, two infinities do not represent the same number. You essentially don't know the value of infinity, that's why it's undefined.

...the concept of an completely undefined state will not disprove infinity either.

Infinity is an undefined or error state, because it indicates that you do not have enough information to determine a specific value.

Anselm's god "proof" that the mere existence of the concept of infinity proves god s existence, which doesnt pan for me.

You can't divide infinity into two parts because you don't know the value of infinity.

infinity/2=infininty because error/2=error.

...perhaps it does exist, and we have no knowlege of it.

This is called justification. Even if it did exist, we could not say that it exists without cause.

I mention the mystic types because they often accepted the idea of an undefined, non-infinite god.

A non-infinite god can be defined. That's the problem. Such a god will always be less than infinite and opens up the possibility of multiple and greater gods. This is why people still cling to a disproven idea. The alternatives are not that good.

I look forward to read Hitchens new book on God.

I do not believe for a second that they were attempting to evade having logical proofs, for they often were ripped apart, burnt, staked, stoned for precisely their beliefs, for being heretics.

They evade logical paradoxes. A logical proof of god would only show that god is possible, not that god really exists. That still requires physical evidence.

These people were anything but cowards.

I'll bet you think the WTC suicide attackers were cowards. People who believe in god/afterlife are so suicidal, but it is fear that drives them to suicide not courage. Courage is for living. Suicide is a shortcut out if you believe it leads anywhere.

If anything those kinds of beliefs led to advances in the science of the time (see Giordano Bruno).

You like people who were killed by the church for using their heads. Good. Of course, I will do everything I can to stay out of their hands myself.

...zen koans, the contemplation of which leads to enlightenment - the point being that linear thinking is ill equipped to deal with infinity.

Confusing riddles are a signature of brainwashing and trigger a red light in my mind. True enlightenment is not achieved through confusion.

This is not aesthetics - a perfect god is limited by its perfection - there is no where to go beyond perfect.

Perfection is an aesthetic quality, period. Anything perfect by any measure would need to be infinite in that measure, but when we say that something is perfect, we mean that we see no flaws, even if the flaws are smaller than we can perceive. But one person may perceive differently than another.

My reading of the Grand Hotel Paradox (thanks for the reference by the way) is that there is no contradictions within the paradox - unless you view it as a static concept - which is not necessary.

Like the Barber Paradox, such a thing cannot exist in reality.

I find it extremely difficult to conceive of a universe that is not infinite in some sense.

You can say that it is infinite nothingness, because that is what it appears to be. That is one case where infinity can cancel.

...matter is niether created nor destroyed.

The net amount of energy in the universe must be zero.

Just as an aside, I find that last statement that the net energy of the universe is zero curious - I do percieve an existent energy surrounding me, which suggests to me that it is not zero, ( - perhaps the multiverse is an illusion here?) which if it exists at all then due to the conservation of energy it will not cease to exist - hence a persistent residue constituting an infinity.

I do not find the assertion that if a thing is undefined it does not exist convincing. The principle of Uncertainty in physics states that a complete measurement of matter is necessarily unobtainable. Yet we all have a persistent feeling that we exist, are aware of, existing - yet we are all literally composed of this indeterminate matter.

I would like to point out that any mathematical system comprehensive enough to be capable of simple addition and subtraction will always give undecideable results for certain functions, both a yes and a no (Godel). So all mathematical systems of at least a minimal complexity will be flawed.

the math equation you are using is not an infinity, it is strictly speaking , undefined, not to do with infinity at all.

Also, orders of infinity have been defined as either cardinal or ordinal by Georg Cantor. He defined many different kinds and types of infinities as the inventor of set theory.

Originally posted by liquidself
I do percieve an existent energy surrounding me, which suggests to me that it is not zero,

There can be energy locally, and negative energy in another place that cancels it out.

( - perhaps the multiverse is an illusion here?)

Indeed, there may even be two universes, a positive and a negative. Chiral/handed opposites. The other side of our moebius.

...a persistent residue constituting an infinity.

And if these two universes collapse back into each other, they would annihilate. It can still apply to one universe if the net energy is zero.

If net energy is not zero, it begs for Origin. God is simply not an explanation. Neither is infinity.

I do not find the assertion that if a thing is undefined it does not exist convincing.

I'm sure I said before that is not what undefined means. Undefined references a value, but that value can't be known. As with the Grand Hotel, it implies there is a number of rooms, a value. You can't enter infinity into a calculator, it is an absence of value.

the math equation you are using is not an infinity, it is strictly speaking , undefined, not to do with infinity at all.

Infinity is defined as undefined. Look it up. That is why you can't enter infinity into a calculator to solve equations at their boundaries. You might deduce that a function is zero or infinity at infinity through projection, but that would be wrong.

The last significant figure of pi is undefined. The infiniteth digit is undefined. The undefined digit is undefined.

Also, orders of infinity have been defined as either cardinal or ordinal by Georg Cantor. He defined many different kinds and types of infinities as the inventor of set theory.

Set theory is abstract, like infinity itself. Counting to infinity is something you can describe abstractly but by definition you can never do.

A funny thing happens when you try to get one person out of the Grand Hotel.

I think that saying that infinity is an abstract concept does not logically rule out it's existence - it seems that the question of whether mathematics actually exists objectively or subjectively has finally reared its ugly head. I don't necessarily subscribe to what any dictionary has to say about the meaning of a given word - though what I can find it can be defined as "without limit" or as "endless", in other words, you can define it positively as "always more" or negatively as "always less". I think of it as very akin to the concept of the "universal" in the sense of applying to all groups or objects in its class - so to me infinite shades very easily, in fact necessarily, into "all" - they are transcendental modifiers, like the word "stuff". Thus for me the concept of "infinite" is crucial to being rational - as being rational is having the ability to apply univerals and conceive of a class to which all things apply, or a state from which no change is possible - this isnt just theoretical, without this side of thought we could not apprehend things self-consciously. I found the following article:

whatis.techtarget.com...

which suggests to me that "undefined" and "limitless" are not identical, even mathetmatically.
Also; language as the home of information is itself abstract by nature, yet we use it quite efficaciously for everyday practical uses. The lack of definition of a thing says nothing about its existence.

Im not sure about the Chiral handed univereses, I thought perhaps you were referring to the fabled "dark energy" of physicists? - even if a total null void entropy is achieved, the "quantum froth" itself allows for random particle events (uncertainly principle) to occur at the microversal level ?

-1 to 0 to 1 (infinity between 0 and -1/1) -1.0 to -2 is infinity 1 to 2 is infinity.

Every negative & positive between the next number is infinity. For every negative number there is a positive number. For every positive number there is a negative number. Infinity is 1 never ending "thing".

[edit on 23-5-2007 by jwater88]