Proving infinity

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by mmmmgood422, Aug 6, 2003.

  1. here it is:

    infinity must exist at least in a psycological sense. as scientific theory goes, halves work like this. if you take a step towards something, and the next time you take a step half of that distance, and nest half of that, then half of that, and so on. techincally you will never reach the object. but in reality you do. infinity must exist because there is no number of halves which you can divide and reach zero theoretically. whether it exists or not in the physical world i cannot say. the universe? pretty mind blowing stuff.
  2. oh man, i love discussions about infinity.
    i hate them too because our language is so restrictive and causes difficulty at every turn.

    i have seen the vission to realise the meaning of infinity, and how it does not exist as outhers percieve it to. so often we hear people say things like paralel lines are two lines that if the kept on going they'd never meet for infinity. this is typical of what i mean. this is a either a missuse of the word infinity or my version of infinity needs a new description.

    my point is, infinity if it were to ever be "calculated" would encompass everything. i've often called this true infinity. True Infinity would not just be the two lines going on and on endlessly, true infinity would mean that the lines would keep going until they consume all to the point that nothing but the lines exist.

    another way of trying to crack open our limited scope of perception on this matter is to consider the infinity symbol. (for some reason my character map isnt working so i'll use the figure eight instead)


    the rough idea behind the infinity symbol is that it is a line that keeps on going if you were to follow its path. but, this is only one line, if you were to add another to it at a right angle we have not broken the "infinity" of its path, we have simply "doubled" it. there is no real break in the link, as the point in the middle, we are asuming is a perfectly infantesimal singularity, so, the two symbols cross and exist in teh same point. now what if we were to add more? and more? and keep adding more symbols? ... think about it.... not just in two dimensions, but in three. ... what would you be left with even the tiniest bit into your journy of adding more? .... a sphere. a sphere (a perfect one) encases within it many smaller "infinities". for example, the central point i've already mentioned. another example (i came up with this one whilst looking at the edge of a glass whilst tripping once) is the edge, no matter from what angle it is viewed, if you look right to the very edge, to the most precise extreme possable, you will be nearing another "infinity".

    this is what i mean by examples of other peoples definition of infinity. infinity by this rule of thumb exists all around us everyday. not only that but there are imperfect infinities too.

    but INFINITY, the True infinity i speak of, could only be truely percieved of as everything. no matter where you start from, and on what scale, if true infinity is to exist then it is to be everything. EEEEEVVVVEEERRRRRRYYYTHING! :D

    ahhh, i'll leave it at that for now. but asuming i havnt killed this thread with that, ya know i'll be back to waffle on some more. ;D
  3. ahhh fantastic digit. the flaw with you figure eight example is that a line does not bend without the assistance of something else.

  4. i have so thought about that!!! thats so true!!!!
  5. there is really nothing in this universe that is truly infinite. very big yes, but not infinite.

    most thoughts about infinity is just that, thoughts. mind scenarious that don't hold up to the real world. let me give an example:

    imagine a cone. it is 1 meter wide at the top, and it tapers down by a tenth for every 10 centimeters you go down. since it is reduced in diameter by 10% continously it will never reach zero whith at it's point end. therefore, it would continue downwards forever, and the outside area of it would be infinite as well. however, if you poured water into the cone, you would reach a finite amount of water it could hold, due to the size of watermolecules.

    therefore, if you put real world (water) entities into imagined models (cone) of infinity, you soon find that infinity is really just a product of your mind.
  6. perfection only exists within terms and infinity only exists without terms

  7. damn girl! (uhh, you are i girl i asume)

    you got me with that one.

    or at least i thought you did until i considered the concept some more.

    well, in that case we can only asume that the point in the middle is "infinately" dense to create such vast amounts of gravity due to there being an "infinity" of sumbols to create the perfect sphere.

    and please note... i AM using those quotation marks again. this is not true infinity.

    like Zy pointed out. nothin in the universe is infinate. the only possibility of there being something infinate is the universe itself.

    good example of the old definitions of infinity there zy. dig it, dug it. ;)

    now... onto what Krazi say....

    maaaaaaaaaaaan!!!!! are you trying to blow my mind with your genius!?


    *mind blown*

    that was infinately perfect KraziHare!!!
    *wink & nudge* geddit? lol.
  8. a sphere exists only within 3 dimensions. what is beyond the sphere that is infinity? ahhhhh you see this sphere does not and cannot exist there for what is beyond the existence of infinity?
  9. nothing can exist beyond true infinity.

    but the limited infinities we've covered more here.... a greater infinity can exist beyond them. thus why they are not and cannot possibly be infinity even by their own definitions, there in lies the theories self destructive paradox. i think its just another way of saying what Zy already covered.

  10. you perfectly contradicted the meaning of infinity by "true infinity". there cannot be a "limited infinity" or "greater infinities" because infinity is itself a complete existence/nonexistence. when you say "nothing can exist beyond true infinity" well what is beyond infinity? better yet, what is existence? what is nothingness? but i proved that inifinity is existant at the start of this thread. what of that? my brain hurts.
    i spilled sweet and sour sauce on my bedsheets!

  11. A paradox in itself, because that would infer that infinity has bounds, thereby negating the entire concept of infinity.

    As digit stated, the problem with defining something of this nature lies within the limitations of words and even our rudimentary grasp of the basic concepts of the cosmos. In essence we are labeling something that cannot even be theorized on with our current understanding. Infinity is the "god" of science, something that cannot (yet) be proven, but something in which we "believe" without ever knowing what "it" is besides 8 letters and a cute lil' symbol.

  12. yep. exactly.

    dontchya just love it.

  13. Or to put it another way, the conceptulaization of "nothing" does both prove and disprove infinity. If it can be proven that "nothing" exists outside infinity, that can mean that infinity is "all that exists"

    But' because of the acknowledgement that there is such a thing as nothing causes it's definition to be "that which is beyond infinity", then this negates because then nothing also becomes part of known existence.

    Infinity, in order to be, must evolve to be "all that exists, including nothing" I think this is what Digit means to define as "true infinity" applied to multiverse theory, with a lol bit of superstring sprinkled on top, as also could be part of the dark matter/dark energy mystery, and the enigma of what time really is besides soemthing we percieve.

    Truly a "quantum language" is needed to convey the "truth" of infinity, one in which computers may make possible.

    My "matrix theory" can be summed up kinda like this:

    Superstring theory predicts 10 dimensions, 4 of which encompass our "known universe", that of which is all we can observe. All the known stuff accounts for a figure that is in constant flux and debate in the scientific community, but always seems to fall at a medain of 30-40% of the mass required for gravity to work. This means that everything we know about existence makes up rougly one third of what is requireds for existence to be in the state that it is. What's the significance of one third? Nothing, that is, until superstring theory is brought into the picture. We have access to 4 dimensions, yet now it seems there is "physical" evidence to support the existence of other dimensions, as their "mass" causes an effect on gravity. For the model of dark matter/dark energy to be applied to superstring theory would require a common dimensional interface, or "time". Think of this as a "shared dimension" between 3 physical "multiverses". With science we can detect the physical presence of layered "universes" (ha, plural universe? another paradox!) but we yet lack the means of interaction with the other layers. Now, what if superstring theory only applies to our "dimensional matrix" structure of 3dx3d+1d, and accounts for all matter we can prove to exist through gravitational mass. Is there another dimensional arrray layerd on top of our array? Is any array truly "ours" or is that just one way of saying "the present". An "infinite" amout of "instants" has long been theorized as the definition of time, but what if time's "instants" are these layered dimensional arrays, like an onion with infinite skins? (would this also account for the expanding "universe" theories?") This would mean that what we call time is actually a continuous quantum transdimensional journey. in which what appears to be drifting away in space is actually drifting away in time, crossing into the next dimensional matrix array element and becoming dark matter/energy.

    Could this (alternate deimensional matrix element) be when(not where) "aliens" and "ghosts" come from? Could they be the same "being" both physically(ufo's, beings, nuts and bolts stuff) and metaphysically(ghosts apparitions, etc taking a "transdimensional holographic" form) interacting with our dimensional matrix element?

    Maybe the infinity sign shoudl really be this: ?

    Because when you answer one question, it asks two more. Our wonder of existence may be the only "true infinity"


    PS, Hell yeah, i love these threads, make ya thnik when yer stoned!
  14. yeah i wish i was stoned for this, it lets you think with so much more clarity. all i got is the fortnight old afterglow from the shroomies. (too tired to really focus too)
  15. Damn Digit! I got a fat sack sittin right here, if you were closer we could blaze this fucker up!

  16. one interesting idea regarding "dark energy" is that it is really some kind of super-vacuum, working from outside the boundaries of our universe (extra dimensions?) against gravity trying to tear the universe apart untill it peters down into nothingness. this would certainly explain the ever increasing rate of expansion of our universe.
  17. blatant bump
  18. What about a circle? Why not?
    It's endless (unless you want to consider the starting point the ending point as well if you know what I mean)

  19. Circles are just two-dimensional line segments!!

  20. in many cultures that is the symbol for infinity.

Grasscity Deals Near You

Similar Threads
  1. Buzzwell420
  2. Kardredor
  3. rsorola1
  4. g0pher
  5. JesusC

Share This Page