Does it equal an infinite number? Or a finite number? And if it equals a finite number, does that not mean that any finite number can become infinity? And, finally, what is infinity divided by two? Shit, Infinity is fucking trippy.

infinity minus one is infinity. infinity divided by 2 is infinity. you cant calculate finite numbers with infinity. however, infinity is fuckin trippy................ like the infinite universe

you should visit the hotel infinity, it will have some answers http://www.ccs3.lanl.gov/mega-math/workbk/infinity/inhotel.html there are weirder ones.. infinity/infinity=? infinity*0=? infinity-infinity=? and to make matters more fun, there an an infinite number of infinities! it's all about mappings and counting http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A593552

http://forum.grasscity.com/spirituality-philosophy/173939-infinity.html If youre interested in the concept of infinity I would visit this thread....there were some cool ideas thrown around. Infinity is a really mind-opening concept if you think about it.

Inf - 1 = indeterminate inf / 2 = indeterminate inf/ 0 = indeterminate inf ^ 0 = ind any operation involving real and non-real numbers is indeterminate... to really understand all applications of above examples you need to know abstract algebra/ set theory

you cant always say inf - X will be infinity there are cases where you have infinity, subtract a certain number and no longer will have infinity if anybody is in calc 2 you will see exampls of this when you reach taylor series

The first two are not correct, I'll use as an example, the number of members(Cardinality) of the infinite set of positive integers, starting from 1. Let's call it Q. ie Q=sizeof( Z+ ) (where Z+ is the set of positive integers) Q is an countably infinite quantity, countable because you can start from 1, then 2,3,4,5,.. and so on, and eventually every member of the infinite set will be reached. If you take this set, and remove all of the even numbers ( Q` = sizeof(Z+, odd)), you still have an infinite number of odd numbers to count, the cardinality of this new set, the value of Q` is the same as Q, infinite. So to speak, even though there is half the elements available to count, you won't be able to finish counting any faster. So here, infinity/2 = infinity It would be the same if you removed a single element, (ie Q'' = sizeof(Z+) -1) (so counting from 2,3,4,....), the value of Q'' is the same as before.

there is no such thing as infinity. nothing is infinite, and if it was, it could not be proven through any reasonable mathematical equation.

And cardinality is part of set theory, which i mentioned in my first post. I wasnt sure if i could really start a discussion involving set theory here, so i tried to give a more simplistic answer inf - 1 depends on how you define infinity, thus its indeterminate you can have inf - 1 = inf likewise you can have inf - 1 = C

Hoorah, a fellow set theorist. Do you have any examples of inf - 1 = C? I can't think of any. Of course it depends on the context, because 'infinity' by itself doesn't provide a definition, you must delve deeper to understand. I wonder, how do the doubters of infinity feel about complex numbers? you can't hold sqrt(-1) apples, but that does not make complex numbers any less 'real' in terms of our mastery of all things physical. Using infinite series approximations is a very common method in physics, useful to describe... everything that we could possibly describe actually. The Fourier Series is relentless in physics, a very powerful tool which can ANY function. Infinity is as hard to deny as the number 1.

You pretty much nailed it saying inf. depends on context... i think thats what alot of ppl dont really understand, it seems ppl think of infinity as a really, really big number when it isnt really a number, its more of a concept. There isnt 1 infinity like there is only one number 10 or 12 or 400 you cant just define infinity, the behavior of infinity depends on how you reached infinity when i mentioned the inf - 1 = c earlier, i had in mind taylor series its possible to have series A diverge to inf. but have series A-C = D ;C and D are constants so in essence you have inf - some number = another real number

I don't think so. Only if you are working with integers. You could rotate a object in a infinity number of steps compared to another object. There's no need for continuity there, just really really small steps. No need for something in between step number 1 and step number 2 regardless of how small these steps are.

infinity minus one is the equivalent of the sound a box makes when being ripped open or the chattering of the leaves as the cold autumn air makes its way to give you a breathe of air or the serenade that whisks itself into your ears as you fall asleep yea they're all the same.

Wouldn't time be infinite then? I believe there is some mathematical formula for time.... EDIT:: And even after we, this planet, this universe- is long gone there would still be a relation with time to describe how long that has been (just no one around to understand it). Yea- I think time is infinite.

Because when we are all long dead and forgotten about- a thousand years or even a million years from (or better yet- an infinite amount of years) the time you died (or planet exploded or whatever caused the demise of life) there would be a way to relate the time it happened to the present. Time is continuous- there for it must be infinite. Your time/our time may end- but does time still go on? Of course, we do not keep the universe going- there is still time. The time we use is just based around our solar system.

I still like to ponder infinity though. I heard this idea a while back: There is a library, and it houses both an infinate number of red books, and an infinate number of blue books. If you remove all of the blue books, you still have an infinate number of books.

But you cannot have an infinite number of red and blue books. Those are objects and all objects can be added together to form a number. EDIT:: And yes this includes stars, although we do not know how many stars are actually out in space- it would be absurd to think the number is infinite. I would prefer them to say there are large amounts or inconceivable amounts of stars. Just like an inconceivable amount of books exist. EDIT 2:: Now do not take objects and confuse it with an effect- Such as- there is an infinite amount of magma or an infinite amount of asteroids/meteors. There is an infinite amount of magma, as well as meteors- however they are based on reactions of other elements. Is there an infinite reaction- IDK but I would guess- NO. Sand is a great one- new sand is being formed with each wind, wave, abrasive act on rock. Will there always be these reactions to create sand? In our lifetimes- but at some other moment in time IDK.... At some point you would have to assume that all the sand has been formed and then the number is not infinite. EDIT 3- I take the stars example back- that too is based on reaction.