Infinity is illogical

reply to post by googolplex


Time is in fact endless with no beginning.
This earth and this universe have a beginning and an end.
All compounded phenomena have a beginning and end.
What is timeless and endless is awareness and space.

Science cannot answer the beginning of awareness.
Science is clueless when it comes to the nature of the mind
and awareness.

Awareness is not limited by distance.
If you ever had a deja vu you would have experienced the transcendance
of distance and time.

reply to post by tobiascore


Mind and matter are not separate.
You can Be what you see. Mind is unlimited in this regard too.
Matter is a function of collective mind.
It would take a few hours to go into the physics
and it's getting late therefore
I recommend reading Matthieu Ricard.
His father was a nobel prize winning physicist and
he was following in his footsteps.
His book is called, "Quantum and the Lotus."
It will answer your questions in this regard.

Originally posted by Electricneo
reply to post by tobiascore

 

Mind and matter are not separate.
You can Be what you see. Mind is unlimited in this regard too.
Matter is a function of collective mind.
It would take a few hours to go into the physics
and it's getting late therefore
I recommend reading Matthieu Ricard.
His father was a nobel prize winning physicist and
he was following in his footsteps.
His book is called, "Quantum and the Lotus."
It will answer your questions in this regard.

I appreciate the reccomendations. But I understand all this very well.

If you wanna say mind and matter are the same, I agree. I picture our universe like a bedsheet, and us as individuals are like protrusions in the bedsheet that's bounded by a rubber band (physics). The illusion is sperteration, but it's all the same bedsheet (consciousness).

But you gotta model it as something to form your of theory of reality. Digital physics is on the rise. It explains everything.

Originally posted by Astyanax
You misunderstand. Only a person with very little understanding of science would think that current scientific orthodoxy is once and for all true. You were accusing me of thinking that. I merely explained that I am not such a person.

You contridict yourself, your statements point the opposite direction. Not to mention I notice the common use of that phrase by those that think mankind's systematic attempt at understanding the universe transcends *not to mention somehow magically cancels out his nature* the people that created and maintain it to attack those that disagree. But I think we should drop this now, don't you agree?

Change is certainly pervasive throughout the universe. That doesn't make it infinite. The universe is not infinitely variable; the ambit of variability is at all times bounded by the laws of physics. The universe is full of constants: the gravitational constant, Planck's constant, the cosmological constant and so forth.

And all called constant by that finite YOUNG speices I spoke about earlier. By what basis do we have the ability to know for sure? Mathmatical models? It's worth noting that models are subject to the limits and mistakes of the creator.

[edit on 23-4-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

The creator's will is perfect and he is without mistakes or errors and would know no limits.

[edit on 23-4-2009 by OmegaPoint]

reply to post by stevedel0

You cant measure infinity so basically were all going nowhere fast here.

Why do we have to measure infinity?

As loner007 says two posts below yours, you can't do an infinite number of things in a finite time. And we know the universe is of finite age, so we can be sure it hasn't expanded to infinite size. So far, everything we've encountered in nature has had finite boundaries.

As sure as I am that the universe is nothing but infinity nothing I can put on paper can prove that because infinity cannot be measured.

Perhaps it would help if you explained why you are so sure of this.

* * *

By the way, one thing I think we have proved in this thread is that the OP is in error: infinity, whether or not it exists in nature, is certainly logical.

Poor Euclid, he must be rotating at substantial RPMs in his grave.

Infinity is not at thing or a number, it is a logical construct to denote things that are not finite. One can never have "infinity" anything, butone can also never have a finite number of some things, which means that the collection is not finite (i.e.infinite).

Euclid used this method to prove there is no largest prime, which we can use to show that the set of integers is infinite. Suppose it is not. Then there is a largest integer which we can all N. Then we can construct N+1 which is a larger integer. Therefore there can be no largest integer since we can always make a bigger one. Ergo, integers are not finite.

As one of my professors pointed out, all infinity means is that we haven't reached the end yet.

All the rest is just pseudo mysticism. Except for Chuck Norris who apparently counted to infinity. Twice.

[edit on 25-4-2009 by metamagic]