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.

# I can debunk "Infinity" in less than 8 minutes

page: 16
8
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:07 PM

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)

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 05:07 PM

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

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:13 PM
What would physical infinity appear as? What are examples of what it would take for physical infinity to exist?

Could there be multiple 'kinds' of physical infinity?

or is the word and concept of physical infinity always equal to a specific aesthetic and functioning physical existence?

Is physical infinity = to all physical possibilities existing at the same time always?

Or is physical infinity the idea that, that last question can not be possible, and so if anything, it would take an infinite amount of time to express a portion of a physical infinity?

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 12:06 AM

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.

Really. You're not too sure about that since you're asking so many questions. Maybe you just don't like it or understand it. I think I've been fairly clear. 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

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:40 AM
It seems clear the OP and some others on this thread are not interested in science and logic but rather trying to advance their own rigid views using any tactics they can think of. When logic and reason inevitably fail them which is a short space of time they must resort to other tactics, such as misdirection and attack based on their dislike of any response which is not in agreement of their own.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:57 AM

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.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:10 AM

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.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 06:56 AM

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.

You are going to someday have to someday deal with the truth about logical inference if you're ever going to learn about what's real, regardless of what slice of reality you're going to be focusing on at that time in your intellectual development. Inference is and always has been the basis of every scientific discovery that's ever been made, and it's how the majority of everything that's known is established as being true and verifiable. You don't have the authority to simply dismiss direct logical and factual inference. No one does. I acknowledge that it exists, and I learn from it. I don't insist on my own view of reality. I allow myself to be open to what direct and progressive inference reveals to me. There's nothing childish or laughable about employing the exact same intellectual tools that all scientists and researchers use and have always used.

Just because you're not adept in the practice of inference doesn't mean that I'm not. And that's not an egotistical statement either. I'm probably a better guitarist than you are too, but that's just because I've devoted 40 years of my life to the guitar. You get good at what drives you, and deduction is what drives me and always has. Even longer than playing the guitar and learning how to express myself with it. Why wouldn't I be good at accurate deduction if I've spent my entire life refining it within a myriad of application arenas? Hell, with over 4 decades of developing my deductive reasoning skills, how could I NOT become good at leveraging logical inference?

I'm not some kid who's just gotten bit with a new theoretical bug, and the claim that physical infinity doesn't actually exist isn't my own personal view. It's a widely held scientific tenet, and it's the literal basis of Quantum Physics as a whole - regardless of what the popular gossip on YouTube might try to suggest.
edit on 12/19/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:07 AM

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 reflection in a mirror is nothing more than a reflection in a mirror. That "world" within that mirror does not exist. It just doesn't. It's an optical illusion that is created by the light reflecting back at you in a very specific manner.

Here's the Wiki definition's first line...

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.

This is an absurd debate. Really. You're telling me that I'm not making sense because I refuse to accept an optical illusion as proof of physical infinity? I have no respectful statements to add to this reply, so I'll let it go at that.
edit on 12/19/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:22 AM

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

What you believe and how you choose to define infinity isn't any part of this discussion. You are just a guy posting on a web site message board. That's all you are. That's all any of us are. There is a definite definition of the term infinite as it relates to the properties of physical reality. This is that definition.

unbounded or unlimited; boundless; endless: - dictionary.reference.com...

No other definition clashes with this definition as it describes infinity's relationship to actual physical reality. It doesn't matter at all if you agree with this definition or not. It doesn't matter if you believe that there is no such thing as something that exists within physical reality that is literally boundless, endless, or limitless in physical presence, power, or in whatever sense such infinite nature can be expressed. The evidence proves that there can't be anything that possesses infinite qualities or is of an infinite quantity within the entire realm of all that exists as possessing a relative being state. This is just plain fact, and is easily demonstrated by way of extremely rudimentary logical inference. Which is all I did with that video clip.

You are not required to believe it, but your refusal to believe it doesn't change the fact of it be true.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:24 AM

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

Who are you to say what the infinite can or can not do?
Your finite mathematical laws, your finite physical law; don't apply to the infinite. Neither does your opinion. Our laws only apply to our finite existence.

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:

Finite can only be formed by the infinite. Finite must exist within the infinite. Finite can only become infinite.

You will never grasp this.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:25 AM

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)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:31 AM

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)

If a compressing infinity - forming a finite confine, as a result - fits any theory whatsoever, then that theory is in serious trouble. There's no logical integrity at all displayed within such a notion. It seems to suggest a conscious mind within the property of infinity itself. That's like saying that tall can decide whether to become short at will. That's not even grammatically possible.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:33 AM

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.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:35 AM
reply to post by NorEaster

That is a decent response which I can respect. I believe our current scientific knowledge points to it being more probable that the infinite does in fact exist than not exist. I can 'debunk' infinity in less than 8 minutes, that really is asking for trouble.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:37 AM
reply to post by NorEaster

As it turns out that is exactly what I mean by infinite. Now you are just saying it's true because I say so. You have no argument.
You can't debunk infinity. LOL. If it was so clear cut everyone would agree with you and no one does. Bye.
edit on 19-12-2012 by JimTSpock because: arguing with moron

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:00 AM

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.

No. What you need to do is realize that reality isn't about material confines, but that it is actually about contextual relationships and the ramifications of those relationships. Eventually, I will be dealing with this fallacy as well, but when restructuring anything - even the human perception of reality - the first thing you have to do is some demolition, and long before you begin building what will ultimately replace that defunct structure that no longer serves its purpose.

As you've done so well to illustrate here, the old view of physical reality isn't workable any longer, and patching this theory over that fading premise is not going to suffice. Our technologies have painted the Standard Model into a corner that it can't get out of. There is a change that is coming, but like all revolutions, it'll come right out of the blue, and without any warning whatsoever. This video was just the heads up. There's a lot more coming that will radically change the way that reality is understood, and with that, the nature of human existence on this planet will transform just as profoundly. We are - literally - what we understand ourselves to be. This is what the human experience is based on - our perception of ourselves relative to the whole of reality.

This is the beginning and end of what being human is. Reality itself won't change, but when we have finally established - for everyone - what reality actually is, no one's human experience will escape that fundamental transformation. It will be a new world for Earth's human race. Not as a result of calamity, or physical dimensional transcendence, or even the return of a re-risen Jesus, but as a result of the human mind's realization of what is actually real, and how it does - in fact - fit into that reality. The gnawing schism between what the mind insists and what the brain knows can't be possible will then be eliminated, and that core conflict's obliteration will be experienced as a sudden peace that this human race has never known.

This is an exciting time to be alive and human on Planet Earth.

edit on 12/19/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:04 AM
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.

PS I think you might have just entered loony country. But you can sort of tell that already.
edit on 19-12-2012 by JimTSpock because: add

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:08 AM

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

It's happening right now. Right here. Like I said, this is a wake-up call. This will take years, but it's already begun.

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:23 AM

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.

You're right, I'll never grasp it, because it's illogical, irrational and idiotic.

You can't hijack an accepted mathematical concept to suit your own means -- finite and infinite are principles whose meanings are well defined, and something that is finite cannot become infinite, by definition. A finite mass cannot become infinite by increasing mass, because the difference between what it is at any given moment and what it was at some point in the past, is measurable.

top topics

8