I'm not sure if I understand the word "infinity"

I've seen different posts, different news articles and such of nasa finding world's that are deemed possibly fit for life, and I guess my question is.. If we are to believe that space is infinite, that our 3 dimensions don't have limits, aren't there things we can assume?

For instance, if the circumstances that make our world fit for life only seemed to have a probability of occurring once in a few billion light years, that would mean our universe would hold a double-digit amount of of these world's - and that's just in our tiny little corner of space!

Going with the big bang theory ( which I realize isn't the most current theory) - this universe was created from gases coming together, basically. Over a long amount of time, gases had gravitational pull on each other and eventually it was so dense, nothing more could come together or be contained, so boom! Universe created.

But infinity is a rather large number. Even if it took (1x10^trillionth)^trillionth years of time, and that same amount of space gases to turn into our one universe.. That's not a measurable amount of infinity.. Nothing is.

So can we just assume life like us is out there? Can we just assume a lot of things because a sample size of infinity means if it's possible, it's likely happened? Or do we need to confine our experience to what we see with our own two eyes and deny things that are beyond our understanding?

a reply to: deadlyhope

NASA pick world's suitable to support our lives. Based on what we are able to observe.
Our needs.

If aliens exist then their needs maybe different. We may have found planets with other life on them, but until we know what we're looking for, we won't find anything or won't find out.

a reply to: deadlyhope

But infinity is a rather large number

The Archers Paradox.

An archer shoots an arrow from point A (archers position) to point B (the target). We agree that the arrow travels from point A to point B.

In order for the arrow to arrive at point B, it must first travel half that distance. In order to travel that "half distance" it must first travel half of that "half distance".........and half that distance, then half that distance etc etc etc....as in maths, it therefore will travel an infinite number of "half distances" thus NEVER arriving at point B. (think - decimal places.0.00015639507846241233 etc etc etc etc etc go on forever)

BUT, it arrives at point B...does it not?

IMO, that is infinity - it is both infinitesimally minute and massive in it's size.

Space may not be infinite. According to the big bang theory space started small and grew like a bubble. It is speculated if you traveled far enough and fast enough you could end up back where you started.

a reply to: VP740

Yes, there are infinite numbers between 1 and 2, but I am talking about large numbers. To live a 3d existence, it makes no sense for any of those dimensions to ever stop. Not to say they couldn't... I guess we could put some small limit on this discussion.

1, followed by a trillion zeros, in light years.

What are the possibilities in that small amount of space?

Maybe Infinity is not real. Maybe all things end at a certain point.

1000 years from now scientists might laugh about our current perception.

Just like how we laugh at flat-earth theories and geocentric theories, just an example.

a reply to: VP740

Then comes the theory that makes more sense to me at least, multiple universes, and multiple, or countless big bangs. Why assume all of everything that ever existed, exists in this tiny.. 13 billion? Light year bubble?

a reply to: frostie

Perhaps. I suppose some men fight with the idea that things could just keep going, some fight with the idea that things could ever end.

Personally, I fight with an ending. So.. There's a wall in space where nothing can exist anymore? Not only is it a void, and blank, and dark, and lacks atoms and photons and everything else but it never could contain those things?

originally posted by: VP740
Space may not be infinite. According to the big bang theory space started small and grew like a bubble. It is speculated if you traveled far enough and fast enough you could end up back where you started.

That's interesting. Does that mean it has edges? If so, I wonder what is on the other side of the edges?

The big bang theory is a nice concept but it lacks of understanding.
There are many questions:

gases in middle of what ?
where would they come from ? out of nothing ? i mean floating gases which comes from where ?
why should they 'explode' if there is no external agent which is acting like a catalysator ?
how can they pull eachother when there is nothing else arround ?
why should they move if there is no movement ?

how much of it would be needed, to make a such explosion, which can make the whole universe spawn ?
... with all its heat/cold levels, with this many different atoms, forms etc.

all this would hint, that there were times before Big Bang.

i have aswell, had some thoughts about big bang, and have wrote them here on the forum. (iv learned alot since then so i would point into another direction)

the Big Bang is actually stared as a separation from God. it is the Natural grand division from onenes into duality.
this separation looks like it is separating further and further into multiple dimensions and levels.

But the Source is found within the One dimension. where all life comes from. from God.

Have a nice day.

for such questions i refer to a favouite quote of mine by Wittgenstein;

"explanations come to an end somewhere"

a reply to: Hombre

Gases occupying space. Everything has gravity, even the smallest of things, no movement is necessary because gravitational attraction never ceases according to our knowledge. Explosion due to being so compact - think pressure, not ignition.

Well, it would need enough gases or matter to reach critical mass, based on theories. It could have taken a huge amount of time to go from something very dense, and one more speck of dust may have set things off.

And yes, I personally believe that if the big bang is how things happened, God orchestrated it.

But what really bothers me is the most important question which wasnt up yet.
and that is:

Why does this Question about "Big Bang" arises, anyway ?

i mean why, all of sudden is everyone thinking about the Big Bang and the Beginning of the universe.

one explanation would be, that maybe over Media (tv/radio) somehow the interests was awoken.

but then, I am TV and Radio free since arround 2009, and few years earlier that that, i was only watching it less and lesser.

and the thinking about it(big bang) was here aswell ...

Infinite is an indeterminate big number after a point in which any big number makes no difference.

For example if you are a slug that moves 1ft/month and live up to year, infinite is any number above 12 as if its 13 or 1 million it makes no difference, the slug will never get there

a reply to: Indigent

Some people seem to believe that for something to exist, it must be observed. That is something I've never had the opinion of, I think the cat exists even if you close the box. The snail may not be able to travel further than that space, but us humans know more stuff exist around the snail.

I personally believe everything exists as a constant, and that observation is just that.

a reply to: new_here

I guess I didn't explain that well. Let's represent one dimension as a string. If we put an ant on that string it can only move forward or backward. If we tie the string in a circle it will go back to where it started if it walks long enough. The surface of a sphere may be mapped to two dimensions (latitude and longitude). You can move back to where you started on a sphere even though you've been moving away the whole time. On the surface of a hyper-sphere you could travel in three dimensions.

Newtonian physics uses euclidean geometry. Riemannian geometry can be applied to the surface of a sphere. Relativity uses another form of non-euclidean geometry which allows its spatial dimensions to 'loop' like the ant's string.

As has been mentioned integers may be considered infinite relative to infinitesimals. If the universe is composed of textured space (you can think of textured space as the pixels on a screen), it may be finite though.

If you're interested in the mathematics of infinity look up George Cantor. If you're interested in a book I'd recommend Infinity and the Mind. It's kind of a cheep knock off of GEB, but it's easier to follow and focuses more on infinities.

a reply to: deadlyhope

The way I see it the word 'infinity' takes on a whole new meaning as it represents something of incomprehensible size.

A yard is a light year to bacteria. A mile is a light year to a flea..the Hubble deep field showed us we cannot put a number to the unfathomable size of universe, but then again quarks are so unfathomably small we can't see them.

a reply to: deadlyhope

Us humans are not snails, our infinite is define in other ways, something else may have a bigger infinite and things beyond ours have significance to them.

I will never earn more than 10 millions in my life, anything above a few billions is just crap loads to me it makes no difference to the amount i manage (infinite) for bill gates a few billions is inside what he manages, a few trillions may be to him his limit of importance, after that everything else may be just crap loads to him too.

did you know you can have infinite> infinite or infinite x infinite = infinite or infinite+-infinite= infinite, infinite is just and undetermined amount that have no further effect on the function you apply it to.

a reply to: deadlyhope

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: Indigent

Some people seem to believe that for something to exist, it must be observed. That is something I've never had the opinion of, I think the cat exists even if you close the box. The snail may not be able to travel further than that space, but us humans know more stuff exist around the snail.

I personally believe everything exists as a constant, and that observation is just that.

I'm with you. Look up E.T. Jaynes. I believe you can read the first few chapters of his book for free on the internet.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: deadlyhope

But infinity is a rather large number

The Archers Paradox.

An archer shoots an arrow from point A (archers position) to point B (the target). We agree that the arrow travels from point A to point B.

In order for the arrow to arrive at point B, it must first travel half that distance. In order to travel that "half distance" it must first travel half of that "half distance".........and half that distance, then half that distance etc etc etc....as in maths, it therefore will travel an infinite number of "half distances" thus NEVER arriving at point B. (think - decimal places.0.00015639507846241233 etc etc etc etc etc go on forever)

BUT, it arrives at point B...does it not?

IMO, that is infinity - it is both infinitesimally minute and massive in it's size.

This is like saying that one can Slice a rock a infnite amount of times. Mathematically it can be done. But not in reality. Because you would need a cutter that is thiner then infinite.

What this basically say is that the rock is already divided a ininifte amount of times before you start dividing. Because the rock would bacically have to be intact, because Your first Slice would have to be infinite thin.

How do you make a cut that is infinite thin on a Object?


If the Arrow travels from A to B. The distance would be finite. The distance is not infininte because B would not be recognized as the end distance traveled if the distance between A and B were infinite. B would not exist, that is basically what you state With Your satement.