It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

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

 

Infinity is an existing being, self aware, mathematically proven....

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 




Excellent thoughts.

I used the cell analogy years ago to blow my friends mind.

Just as on the atomic level, each atom thinks it has it's own existence, and sense of being, so do we. Each atom is incapable (at least I think so) of comprehending that they are a part of something grander than they can sense. A cell

A cell has it's own personality. It's own quirks. It's own community. Environment. It performs it's functions within the community. It too is incapable of comprehending being a part of something grander. Tissue or organ.

Organ --> System

System -> Human being


At each level, the organizations work wthin what they directly sense. At the same time, all levels are happening, and all do work for and effect each other level of existance.

We're all connected to the whole, but it's simply beyond our ability to sense, but not perceive. Why would it be so hard to accept that this goes on forever?

I see all humans as the being of humanity. All of the earth (including humanity) as being Gaia. All planets in our solar system, debris floating around, plus the sun as a solar being. All solar systems within the galaxy, plus all the "random" debris floating in between, the galactic being. All galaxies as the universal being.

This excludes dark matter, black holes, and probably a bit more for the sake of simplicity.



edit for: I changed cosmic being to universal being. I think the universe is God's body, while the cosmos is his mind

[edit on 8-4-2009 by unityemissions]




posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 


the preson who stops askin wins ; )

no reason to ask what infinity is, is there? you see my point and you made it very clear in a reply to me you yourself said

There is no need for infinity if we are not here...

Oh but now we are. what is your question its ok there is an infinite amount of them...

Just becuase you ask does not infact make it right..

Nice to postulate tho.. if you think infinity is a self aware being good for you.. other people call it god.

same thing


Im happy to disagree as its you opinion.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I don't know. I think that everything is probably inclusive.
everything is the sum of the whole.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
 


I think I'm starting to understand you, but would like further clarification.

So you are saying that the only reason we have a concept for infinity is because we don't directly experience this at all times? We find the need to question that which we deny?

I thought you were saying that the meaning behind the concept, the actual existence of infinity was only held within the minds of those who think about the concept.

I'm getting a bit confuzed, on what I thought was so clear. I'm okay admiting fault, or lack of understanding.

While understanding you're probably feeling like a broken record, could you please explain this a bit more?


edit for: spelling

[edit on 8-4-2009 by unityemissions]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Read you loud and clear OP
If I am not mistaken numbers are infinite both directions forever, but what happens if no one is their to count. I believe quantum physics proves reality does not exist unless it is realized, which leads me to the question of if no one is around to hear the tree fall in the woods, does infinite hear it? lol



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 


ok let me point out things we do agree on
I came to a point that the universe is very much alive. its not aware of itself being alive but it is in some ways "us" we are able to understand that we are here but we dont know why we are here we dont know why life is even needed in the universe what role does life play in the universe?? if the universe is indeed infinit then why bother having life? why?

You see this is were my point comes in about the understanding of the word not so much that im right or wrong its just how it is even for me.. you see we cant calculate a question just the same way we can caluclate the ends of infinity

But a question can infact lead to infinit amount of answer = stars galaxies everything we see and know and think is our minds questioning the things we see..

its a level.. you cant exist as an enterty without questions its what makes us who we are "life" i dont mean humans..

Life is the logical counterpart to the universe.. we are its choas but! everytime we ask a question the universe then becomes logical ; )

its a riddle of epic madness hehehe but its so simple so smart so elegent its mind blowing.

I hope that helped.. i was not saying you was wrong just the word you used was
i still think the universe is alive same as your idead really its just i dont use infinity in the same way

look at my name ; ) symmetric.. we are the same thing as the universe.. tho it does not look like what you do when you look into the mirror hehe


infinity question are both the same



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   

that is the point it is absolute by its nature... I do not KNOW if the universe is or is not infinite.. but i do know what the word infinity means... as a WORD..


Once again, based on which objective truth are you determining the meaning of the word infinite? Since our experience is subjective, any arbitrarily chosen meaning for a word can not represent an objective truth. You know what you have subjectively decided the word means, but that does not necessarily dictate what the word objectively means.


I dont know everything nore do i pretend but i do know that infinity as a word is a question.


You know subjectively, or objectively?


I did not call it a being or a thing or say it was alive in some self aware way did i??


I never said you did. The statement you are referring to was made in my first post, which was a summary of the various theories being bandied around as absolute facts by various posters. It was the OP that made the claim that infinity was self aware. I was simply stating that this may not necessarily be the case.


we didnt even have the word when we was around as there was infact no need to use it..


So? Just because we don't have a word for something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It doesn't mean it DOES exist either, it just means you can't prove it either way.


Its a manifestation of the human mind that is unable to quatify its own existance...


Once again, not necessarily. There is no evidence that a concept such as infinity is nothing more than a manifestation of the human mind.


infinity is you mearly asking why on earth we are here and the answers to infinity Is or will be found in the universe


This is what you have decided, and it appears no one is going to shake you from that belief, so I will give up pointing out your faulty logic.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by spartacus mills
 


How about you tell me what inifity means, you seem very sure of it..

Please tell me what a question is and what its use is for please

Then we can move further along :-)

As I understand your argument you are telling me you have no idea what infinity is correct?

You make my point for me.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
in reply to: symmetricAvenger


So subject and object are one. Each is dependent on each other. The chaos and order are intertwined. Each exist for the sake of existence.

Infinity/question is the subject/object point of unity/creation?




[edit on 8-4-2009 by unityemissions]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 


crazy i know..


So? Just because we don't have a word for something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It doesn't mean it DOES exist either, it just means you can't prove it either way.

This is the problem.. look at that statement reaaaaall close

what does it say?

I says i dont have a clue what im talking about...why? One word "prove"

i dont need to prove it you do it everytime you open your mouth.. its how a converstation is made and used

We are having a conversation with the universe its called infinity

like i said. no need to prove it


Unless you can tell me what WHY is infact doing? or WHY you infact questions

Well? WHY do you ask questions?

Loops correct? ; )



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   

How about you tell me what inifity means, you seem very sure of it..


No, you are the only person that has claimed to be sure of it.



As I understand your argument you are telling me you have no idea what infinity is correct?


I'm saying I can make a subjective and arbitrary decision about what infinity is, but this may or may not be a reflection of what it OBJECTIVELY is (note the clarification 'may or may not'). You on the other hand, have decided that your definition is absolute, objective and immutable, and is therefore not open to argument.

What I'm simply trying to point out is that we must always consider that we might be completely and utterly wrong. Something you appear to be incapable of.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
 


My head hurts, but I am getting most of this. It's not the first time I've gone this deep, but it's been a while since I found the need to ask these types of questions.

Guess a refresher is needed after interacting with society for a period of time. It can be hard to keep this perspective while witnessing what seems to be injustice and negativity on a more shallow level.

Thanks for the food of thought. Will be coming back to this thread after a nap..



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Ok, I haven't read a lot of the replies in this thread so ignore me if this has already been brought up.

If infinity is all possibilities that could ever happen in all moments, you could say that one given scenario tells that infinity is a aware being, which also then branches out into an infinite number of situations with infinity being a living thing.

On the other hand, i suppose you could say that there must also be an infinite amount of situations where infinity is non existant, which would make it not infinity.

Summary of post: I lost myself halfway through. Damn it. But I'm inclined to agree with the OP and not with those who are so quick to say that they know everything about the universe and that if they think infinity is just a lifeless concept, then it must be.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Does infinity have an email address? I have some questions.
Thanks in advance.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by RE2505
 


You (r questions) are the address..

Was this meant as sarcasm, or were you looking for someone specifically?



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
what the op said is more or less true (because we're dealing with infinity you will always be right, and wrong, and in between, all at once, and never).

Anyway, in order to actually understand this concept and those surrounding it, you have to not only somewhat understand it logically, but you have to feel it too. A lot of understanding these concepts of novelty, universe ordering itself to higher complexities, mathematical symmetries in the infinitely small-infinitely big, much of these concepts have to be understood by a very strong right-brain, recognition of ABSTRACT pattern.

Abstract is the key here. Many concepts, in fact, ALL concepts were abstract to us at some point. Logic has more or less been able to prove or "catch up" with many of these concepts, but we're beginning to reach a point where the science and the ideas are so complex, many people have trouble even understanding the gist of half of it.

This may sound silly, but this is why i believe many young people, especially between the ages of 16-25/26 are understanding and formulating many seemingly accurate hypotheses about this subject. In the adult population where much of their focus has been on strictly daily routine, left brained thinking, i feel it is very hard for them to even care to attempt to think about this kind of stuff.


Once you understand the logistics of most of the quantum theories and levels, relativity, the complexities or the electromagnetic spectrum, gravity and (Gravitrons) and anti-gravity, etc. you begin to realize how much is becoming possible.

Much of what the op says, even seemingly mundane points, stem from multiple layers of patterns noticed by abstract reasoning.

How do you think Albert Einstein looked back at Big Ben on the bus, and instantly imagined he was a particle of light traveling away from the clock, and he immediately thought "moving at the speed of light, time is distorted to a slower effect" ...



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 



No, I am serious. If Infinity is a conscious being it seems to me he would make an awesome msn buddy.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by spartacus mills
 


I'm saying I can make a subjective and arbitrary decision about what infinity is

So what is it then? simple question or you here to just say you dont know what you do but dont?

You are aruging with yourself not me lol im just asking YOU what infinity is and what a question is

yes?



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
I don't understand how you go into that with infinity.

Infinity is fake, the way it's used in mathematics. You can't really add, divide, or do anything to infinity (though this is sort of a lie, you're just not supposed to most of the time) because it's not a number and doesn't exist. And one infinity isn't the same as another...

When you use it in mathematics, you only use it as a limit. For those of you who need a refresher of precalculus or early calculus, a limit is something you approach, get infinitely close to, but don't touch. A mathematical concept used to solve many problems such as the derivative or in physics to make infinite approximations (ex. energy used to bring a charged particle to a distance x from another charged particle from infinity is its electric potential energy). So you can't just say you multiply infinity by infinity, you have to multiply the limit of x as it goes to infinity by the limit of y as it goes to infinity. Which would be bizarre, and infinity.

There's also different sorts of infinity, which I think I'll best understand after I take a couple upper level math courses (I'm fighting the good fight in the 200 levels now in college), but there is a bizarre behavior of infinities that you can find through a test of surjection.

Surjection is a property of a function. A function is more than you've been taught in high school, or at least, I have. It has three distinct parts. You need, as you know, some rule, say, f(x) = x + 3. You often see it as y = x + 3 if you're graphing it. But you also need a domain and target space (or codomain, sometimes also called the range, but range can refer to either image or target space). Domain is the set of numbers that you plug into the function. You can make it integers (whole numbers), numbers from 1-6, all complex numbers (integers and fractions), all real numbers (all complex numbers plus irrational numbers such as the square root of two and pi), or anything else you want. Your target space is the set of numbers for which you are defining the output of your function, which is just as arbitrary. You can make it whatever you want.

I will also define the image, which is every number the function "hits" for the domain it is defined. For example, you have a function, f(x) = x + 3, where the domain is integers from 0-4 and the target space is integers from 0-10. You plug in 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 into the function and get 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Your image here is integers from 3-7. Your target space was 0-10, and your image obviously lies inside of this target space, but does not span it entirely.

Whether or not a function is surjective is simply saying that the image spans the target space entirely. At first I wondered, why would you test for such a thing, when the target space is something you arbitrarily define? Then I realized potential applications such as a test for surjection as I'm about to describe.

Since we got through the muck (interesting muck if you're me) I can now simply ask, does the number of positive integers including zero (infinite) equal the number of all integers (also infinite)?
To test this, you see if you can create a function which is surjective, where the domain is all positive integers and zero and the target space is all integers. The answer is, yes, you can, if you make some function (we don't need to figure out how to write it mathematically) where 0 is 0, 1 is 1, 2 is -1, 3 is 2, 4 is -2. and so on, until you go to infinity.

Remember, however, that surjection doesn't mean only that you go from one end of the target space to the other. You need to hit EVERYTHING inbetween. If it's integers from 1-10, you have to hit 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. But if it's real numbers from 1-10, you have to hit EVERY SINGLE DECIMAL (there are infinite) between 1 and 10. Your image (output of your function you get when you input all numbers in your domain) must go from one end of the target space to the other without leaving gaps for a function to be surjective.

You do this again asking, does the number of all integers then equal the number of complex numbers (integers and fractions)? It seems like it should be no! But you can, in fact, define every fraction as nothing more than a ratio of integers (as what a fraction is, say, 1/2 is the ratio of 1 to 2), and you can make a function where, as you proceed to infinity, you hit not only every integer but also every complex number. That is, using only the set of integers (whole numbers), you can get out every ratio of integers. So the number of integers and the number of complex numbers are the same, as you can define a surjective function from integers to complex numbers.

But it gets weird here. Can you define a function from complex numbers, or integers, to all real numbers? Remember that real numbers are all complex numbers AND numbers that cannot be described as a fraction (irrational numbers)...which there are, in fact, more of than of rational numbers. This is a famous proof my Euler (who did many, many great mathematical things), which shows that no, you CANNOT define a function from integers to real numbers which is surjective. That is, no matter how you define some function, you will ALWAYS have some numbers inbetween that you did not hit. This is another way of saying that no matter how precise you are, you can always get more precise -- if you hit .0001 and .0002, you just missed .00011, .00012, and so forth. Therefore, and to my surprise, this means that you have an infinite number of integers, an infinite number of fractions (complex numbers), and an infinite number of decimals (real numbers)...but the former two infinities, the infinities of integers and fractions, are LESS than the infinity of real numbers! So infinity, through this test of surjection, cannot equal infinity; therefore, there must be different sorts of infinity. It gets even weirder when you try and add and subtract infinities from one another...but you're not really supposed to do that, since infinity is, in fact, some conceptual construct created to solve problems, and not really a number at all.

[edit on 8-4-2009 by Johnmike]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by symmetricAvenger
reply to post by spartacus mills
 


I'm saying I can make a subjective and arbitrary decision about what infinity is

So what is it then? simple question or you here to just say you dont know what you do but dont?

You are aruging with yourself not me lol im just asking YOU what infinity is and what a question is

yes?


In my subjective, arbitrary, possibly completely wrong yet possibly completely correct and possibly anywhere in between opinion, infinity is boundless, all encompassing and unfathomably paradoxical.

A question is something that has the property of having infinite regress, but is not necessarily equal to infinity itself, yet at the same time may in fact be equal (as per your possibly correct, yet possibly wrong hypothesis).



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join