Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by spy66
No, I'm sorry, but your view of the properties of finite and infinite is utterly nonsensical. Nothing can "shrink" from being immeasurable into being measurable into something that is measurable, and vice versa -- you're implying that there is a boundary, and on one side things are measurable and on the other, they are not, and that's irrational. Either something is measurable, or it is not, and something which is one can never become the other.
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by spy66
No, I'm sorry, but your view of the properties of finite and infinite is utterly nonsensical. Nothing can "shrink" from being immeasurable into being measurable into something that is measurable, and vice versa -- you're implying that there is a boundary, and on one side things are measurable and on the other, they are not, and that's irrational. Either something is measurable, or it is not, and something which is one can never become the other.
Why cant the infinite compress it self and form finite?
Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne
reply to post by JimTSpock
How can something infinite expand? If that is your argument you are contradicting yourself.
If the universe was infinite, why would it expand? How could something infinite grow? If it expands, if it grows, it is not infinite, but finite. Every example you've shown contradicts your own argument.
Originally posted by NorEaster
You do know that the mirror thing is an extremely weak effort to defend the existence of physical infinity. Don't you? You may as well draw a modius strip. Or give a half twist to a strip of paper and glue the ends together. There are those who might think it's clever, but that wouldn't affect the true relationship (or lack thereof) between the concept of physical infinity and reality as it exists.
Originally posted by NorEaster
the true relationship (or lack thereof) between the concept of physical infinity and reality as it exists.
Originally posted by JimTSpock
Originally posted by NorEaster
the true relationship (or lack thereof) between the concept of physical infinity and reality as it exists.
We don't have complete knowledge of reality as it exists. You seem to assume we know everything and thus infinity cannot exist. That is so simplistic and childish it is laughable. You have shown you cannot 'debunk' infinity at all. And to assume you have complete knowledge of all of reality is such an arrogant egotistical view it is delusional.
Originally posted by LiveEquation
Originally posted by NorEaster
You do know that the mirror thing is an extremely weak effort to defend the existence of physical infinity. Don't you? You may as well draw a modius strip. Or give a half twist to a strip of paper and glue the ends together. There are those who might think it's clever, but that wouldn't affect the true relationship (or lack thereof) between the concept of physical infinity and reality as it exists.
You are not making any sense at all. Could you at least answer the question of what the limit is, before you say an uneducated guess. The mirror experiment can be replicated over and over again with the same results. Solve it with equations (physics-- or physical science) because it does exist and can be observed in our reality.
A mirror image is a reflected duplication of an object that appears identical but reversed. As an optical effect it results from reflection off of substances such as a mirror or water.
Originally posted by JimTSpock
Depends on your definition of infinity, which is a valid point to raise.
The examples I've raised fit my definition of infinite, which I have stated. I have never claimed to have proved infinity exists, but raised the possibility that it could. This thread attempts to prove infinity does not exist, I believe that is not possible.edit on 19-12-2012 by JimTSpock because: kirk
unbounded or unlimited; boundless; endless: - dictionary.reference.com...
Originally posted by adjensen
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by spy66
No, I'm sorry, but your view of the properties of finite and infinite is utterly nonsensical. Nothing can "shrink" from being immeasurable into being measurable into something that is measurable, and vice versa -- you're implying that there is a boundary, and on one side things are measurable and on the other, they are not, and that's irrational. Either something is measurable, or it is not, and something which is one can never become the other.
Why cant the infinite compress it self and form finite?
Again, you're not understanding what infinite means. It means unmeasurable, something without bounds or an end. You can't take something that is infinite and make it finite without changing what it is -- you can take the infinite irrational number pi and make it finite by rounding, so pi = 3.1415926, but 3.1415926 is NOT pi, because pi is infinite and 3.1415926 is finite.
What is infinite * 0.5? Half of infinity is infinity.
Infinity - Infinity = Infinity
Finite ^ Finite = Finite (finite raised to the power of finite is finite)
Finite != Infinite (finite does not, and never can, equate with infinite)edit on 18-12-2012 by adjensen because: oopsies ^ 2
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by spy66
No, I'm sorry, but your view of the properties of finite and infinite is utterly nonsensical. Nothing can "shrink" from being immeasurable into being measurable into something that is measurable, and vice versa -- you're implying that there is a boundary, and on one side things are measurable and on the other, they are not, and that's irrational. Either something is measurable, or it is not, and something which is one can never become the other.
Why cant the infinite compress it self and form finite?
Do you have a solid argument?
I know that the infinite is a constant. And have no reason to change unless it wants to do so.
But the infinite was the very first and only dimension before finite appeared. And there is only one dimension who could have formed finite. And that is the infinite.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by spy66
It is not irrational to have a measurement on our finite universe. And its not irrational that the infinite formed our finite universe by a compression. It actually fits our expansion model and theory just fine.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by spy66
No, I'm sorry, but your view of the properties of finite and infinite is utterly nonsensical. Nothing can "shrink" from being immeasurable into being measurable into something that is measurable, and vice versa -- you're implying that there is a boundary, and on one side things are measurable and on the other, they are not, and that's irrational. Either something is measurable, or it is not, and something which is one can never become the other.
Why cant the infinite compress it self and form finite?
Do you have a solid argument?
I know that the infinite is a constant. And have no reason to change unless it wants to do so.
But the infinite was the very first and only dimension before finite appeared. And there is only one dimension who could have formed finite. And that is the infinite.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
Infinity is not a dimension. A dimension is a finite reality confine. A dimension is definable and possesses very specific physical parameters. It's certainly not infinite. You've really gotten yourself turned around here.
This discussion has become pretty fascinating. I'm learning a lot of new things about some of the ways that people process information. I'm glad I launched this thread.edit on 12/19/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by spy66
No, I'm sorry, but your view of the properties of finite and infinite is utterly nonsensical. Nothing can "shrink" from being immeasurable into being measurable into something that is measurable, and vice versa -- you're implying that there is a boundary, and on one side things are measurable and on the other, they are not, and that's irrational. Either something is measurable, or it is not, and something which is one can never become the other.
Why cant the infinite compress it self and form finite?
Do you have a solid argument?
I know that the infinite is a constant. And have no reason to change unless it wants to do so.
But the infinite was the very first and only dimension before finite appeared. And there is only one dimension who could have formed finite. And that is the infinite.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
Infinity is not a dimension. A dimension is a finite reality confine. A dimension is definable and possesses very specific physical parameters. It's certainly not infinite. You've really gotten yourself turned around here.
This discussion has become pretty fascinating. I'm learning a lot of new things about some of the ways that people process information. I'm glad I launched this thread.edit on 12/19/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)
Well the infinite is a dimension of just "one physical void". Thereby it mus be a dimension of its own.
All finite dimensions must exist within the infinite dimension.
Originally posted by JimTSpock
reply to post by NorEaster
OK now that one really explains a lot. I suspected as much. So when is this great revelation happening again?
That's cool bro radical and I'm all for it.edit on 19-12-2012 by JimTSpock because: add
Originally posted by spy66
Finite can only be formed by the infinite. Finite must exist within the infinite. Finite can only become infinite.
You will never grasp this.