Infinite Possibility from Finite Means

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Its like when we think about the universe, an infinite amount of possible explanations of it arise, but the answer is always the same, it never changes.

What is the answer then?

And you answer like this:

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

answer |ˈansər|
noun
a thing said, written, or done to deal with or as a reaction to a question, statement, or situation: he knocked and entered without waiting for an answer.
• a thing written or said in reaction to a question in a test or quiz: write your answers on a postcard.
• the correct solution to such a question: the answer is 280°.
• a solution to a problem or dilemma: the answer to poverty and unemployment is a properly funded range of services.
• [ in sing. ] (answer to) a thing or person that imitates or fulfills the same role as something or someone else: the press called her Britain's answer to Marilyn Monroe.
• Law the defendant's reply to the plaintiff's charges.

All you have provided is a definition for the word 'answer'.
Again, profound?? (Not)
Maybe you could provide one of the infinite possible explanations?
Maybe I don't understand your statement - "an infinite amount of possible explanations of it arise, but the answer is always the same, it never changes." Are you saying the universe never changes or the answer never changes?

reply to post by Itisnowagain

Maybe you could provide one of the infinite possible explanations?

You seem capable enough of coming up with your own, or at least advocating someone else's in place of your own.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


So this again is just clever words?

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Its like when we think about the universe, an infinite amount of possible explanations of it arise, but the answer is always the same, it never changes.

That mean absolutely nothing. Nothing at all to back up what you stated? Nothing?

reply to post by Itisnowagain

That mean absolutely nothing. Nothing at all to back up what you stated? Nothing?

Actually a sentence is something. Whatever someone gets from it is up to them.

You maybe too concerned with the answer and not the equation itself.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


In my opinion, though quantity exists in reality, and physical interactions depends on it (the quantity of atoms a 10 lb lead ball has I assume is double that of a 5 lb lead ball) our numbers are tautological. Just as A=A. 1 = 1.(in physical reality quantity gets interesting because you can point to a group of rocks and say, there are 5 rocks. then remove 4, there is 1 rock remaining. 1 that rock is one. But it is the nature of physical reality that that rock is composed of a vast number of smaller quantities, quantity of molecules, which contain a quantity of atoms, which contain a quantity of subatomic particles, and yes thats one subatomic particle now but it may go into a reaction that comes out with more then 1 particle, and other quantities and qualities of quantities and qualities. You can imagine 1 as a ball with an arbitrary area. But then the concept of 2 would be that balls area, twice. 3 would be the area of 3, 1 balls. or 3 would be 3, 1 balls.

In any reality composed of smallest common denominators or bits ( I couldnt imagine one not using that, would it be numerically or quantitatively valueless waves? Would it be illusionary in some way, hologram, projection, simulation? If you were playing a video game on your computer and you had a player on screen, and I asked you how much quantity is the players hand, how much information or bits = the players hand, would you count how many electrons need to be fired in the computers proceesor to continual keep the hand generated, or would you count some way by the amount of software code it takes to define and = the hand, or would you count the amount of pixels on the screen, all of these values I think would also be fluxing with the passage of time as well) I believe quantity is real and exists. Even a liquid, fluid seemingly quantitatively undefinable (besides I guess the liquids volume and knowing details of molecules) is composed of an exact quantity of parts. And when I try to think of a quantityless substance I think of lava or plasma, even light is thought to be discrete and quantitative as photons. Maybe space is 1 quantity, made of no parts even though its value seemingly exceeds that of 1. If all the energy of the universe was bonded as one substance, not of atoms, or parts, non differentiated, that set would be one object, just as a rock is relatively one object. I guess I would ask where is the line drawn between quantity, if that 1 universal substance, were to have some motion to it, would that then justifiably be considered quantifiable? I guess in levels of energy it would be.

reply to post by Wandering Scribe


About Pi and square root of two containing each other. It is a nice thought (like the infinite monkeys in infinite time typing Shakespeare) I dont think I agree.

I dont get how 2 different infinities can exist. How can infinity not equal infinity? I think numerical infinity is uber abstract, and it would only be proper to say that there exists 1 true numerical infinity; the set of all sets. Because Pi repeating infinitely does not = infinity. It may be a number with an infinite extent, but that does not mean it contains all sets and series of numbers. You say it doesnt have any recognizable patterns, if it was truly infinity wouldnt it have all patterns? infinite times? in infinite variations? Wouldnt there be an infinite series of 1's in there? Why not, true infinity surely would have the case of infinite 1s contained within it.


I can have a number 5.7878787878787878787 and say that the sequence after the decimal repeats infinitely, but that number doesnt represent infinity. It is just not quantifiable in finite means.

reply to post by ImaFungi


My views concerning infinity are the same as this video's:



As for Pi and √2, it has less to do with how we define infinity, and more to do with just the fact that both values include an infinite string of numbers beyond the initial place, so they must include each other somewhere within that never-ending string of decimal-place digits.


~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


In a reply to you I mentioned I thought numbers were tautological. After further thought I think that quantity is absolute. I think in every and any scenario that could ever exist, if there are groupings of objects, or differences, or bits, or atoms, that no matter how you refer in symbolic form to those quantities, 1 object is 1 object, and 5 =5.

A Usage-Based Approach to Recursion in Sentence Processing
Is Language Infinite?
On the Nature, Use and Aquisition of Language

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


It is not truly infinite, true infinity is impossible, but at the same time, all things that have ever happened, are happening and ever will happen, is a small section of the concept of the highest overarching infinity. Though it is impossible to ever be finished by its definition. And it is impossible to achieve infinite possibility from finite means, by the nature of finite means. Once you admit the means are finite you are admitting a limit, and no matter how large or high that finite thing is, or how impossible it is to compute its pairings and orders, there are a finite number of orders. Think of how many atoms must exist in the universe right now let a lone a grain of sand or your body. Its a finite number, the infinite nature of this, like mentioned in an article you posted, is when the finite is increased. This was alluded by saying that new words can be invented. So likewise, new atoms are created and destroyed all the time.