oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jun, 2013 10:01 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
There is no reason that both of these statements couldn't be true.

1) The universe is infinite in space and matter.
2) There is only one planet in the Universe with life.

Actually there is.

Given infinite attempts, if something is at all possible it will eventually happen.

Since we are here, we know life is possible.

Therefore, no matter how unlikely life is, eventually if you travel far enough it will happen again, and again, and again.


maxdancona wrote:
(For the record, I don't believe that either of these statements are true, but logically both could be true at the same time.)

#1 seems to be true, based on our current knowledge.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jun, 2013 11:14 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

I believe that according to physicists, the universe is not infinite, and contains a large, but finite number of stars, formed from the finite amount of matter produced in the Big Bang.


Science does not have all the answers. Humans don't have all the answers.

Compared with what could eventually be known...we may be on a level with ants.

We do not know if what we call the "universe" is everything...or just an infinitesimally small part of something much greater. We do not know if it is actually part of infinity.

We certainly do not have access enough to "everything" to make statements like "there are a large, but finite number of stars."

MY GUESS: Nobody now living on planet Earth knows if the number of stars are finite or infinite.

Where did you get your Physics degree? According to inflationary cosmology, the universe was formed in a specific event 14 billion years ago that created a specific, finite amount of matter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflationary_cosmology
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 03:59 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

There is no reason that both of these statements couldn't be true.

1) The universe is infinite in space and matter.
2) There is only one planet in the Universe with life.

(For the record, I don't believe that either of these statements are true, but logically both could be true at the same time.)





AMEN!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 04:03 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

maxdancona wrote:
There is no reason that both of these statements couldn't be true.

1) The universe is infinite in space and matter.
2) There is only one planet in the Universe with life.

Actually there is.

Given infinite attempts, if something is at all possible it will eventually happen.Since we are here, we know life is possible.

Therefore, no matter how unlikely life is, eventually if you travel far enough it will happen again, and again, and again.


maxdancona wrote:
(For the record, I don't believe that either of these statements are true, but logically both could be true at the same time.)

#1 seems to be true, based on our current knowledge.


The emphasized portion is an assumption based on the fact that you can make assumptions.

It no more follows the fact that the universe MAY BE infinite...than Dale's initial assumption.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 04:05 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

I believe that according to physicists, the universe is not infinite, and contains a large, but finite number of stars, formed from the finite amount of matter produced in the Big Bang.


Science does not have all the answers. Humans don't have all the answers.

Compared with what could eventually be known...we may be on a level with ants.

We do not know if what we call the "universe" is everything...or just an infinitesimally small part of something much greater. We do not know if it is actually part of infinity.

We certainly do not have access enough to "everything" to make statements like "there are a large, but finite number of stars."

MY GUESS: Nobody now living on planet Earth knows if the number of stars are finite or infinite.

Where did you get your Physics degree? According to inflationary cosmology, the universe was formed in a specific event 14 billion years ago that created a specific, finite amount of matter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflationary_cosmology


I do not have a Physic degree. What was created 14+ billions of years ago is WHAT WE CALL the universe. We do not know if it actually is the universe...or just a tiny speck in the universe.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 04:21 am
@oralloy,
You are making the flawed assumption that infinite space and matter equals infinite "attempts" (I am assuming that you are envisioning reality as a bunch of equal dice roles).

I have already given a mathematical counter example...

1) The number line of integers is infinite (i.e. the are an infinite number of integers).
2) Only one integer (in the infinite number of integers ) is two.

Likewise, infinite space and matter doesn't mean that this conversation is happening an infinite number of times.

tomr
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 06:26 am
@Brandon9000,
brandon9000 wrote:
Where did you get your Physics degree? According to inflationary cosmology, the universe was formed in a specific event 14 billion years ago that created a specific, finite amount of matter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflationary_cosmology


Your link does not say there must be a finite amount of matter.
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 10:10 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
1) The universe is infinite in space and matter.
2) There is only one planet in the Universe with life.

(For the record, I don't believe that either of these statements are true, but….
Me nuther of course

Quote:
…….logically both could be true at the same time.)
I'm not so sure about that Max. Life on Earth suggests chance potential, however small. I'd agree the average distance between identical galaxies to be so great that we don't even have a means for expressing it but still infinity is infinitely bigger

Thus at this instant there must be an infinite number of identical Dales chatting with an infinite number of identical Max's

As well as an infinite number identical to that one except for a difference of one quantum unit in the color of one of the cells of your eye etc ad infinitum
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 10:25 am
@dalehileman,
The flaw in your logic is the term "chance potential". The fact there is life on Earth only means that there is a "chance potential" (i.e. probability) of life on Earth. It says nothing about the "chance potential" anywhere else in the Universe.

Infiniteness doesn't take away the possibility of uniqueness. You can be a unique member of an infinite series (as I have already demonstrated with Integers which are unique and infinite).

dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 10:33 am
@tomr,
Quote:
That's an interesting conclusion. However doesn't Big Bang imply finiteness whereas my q assumes an infinity of space and matter


Quote:
If the big bang comes out of a singularity, then it is not a very hard leap to go from finite mass contained in a point to infinite mass.
Point well taken Tom

Quote:
The wikipedia link I gave above claims that an infinite universe is a possibility……...I honestly do not know whether an infinite universe can come out of a big bang or not.
It's very difficult to understand how it could have been a result of a Big Bang which could never reach infinite volume

Quote:
Again I'm not a proponent of infinity and in fact as I asserted above somewhere, it's my subliminal objection to the idea of identical galaxies that somehow rejects the notion


Quote:
……..I think to the perspective of someone living on one of the twin galaxies everything would appear identical.
Tom you have to explain that. I presume by "twin galaxies" you mean them identical but I thought we had already agreed that with interacting fields they couldn't be

dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 10:56 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
The flaw in your logic…….says nothing about the "chance potential" anywhere else in the Universe.
True Max, my assertion is purely speculative and intuitional. But you'll note several others agree with me on this point

But getting back to the original q, assuming things are pretty much the same throughout an infinite Universe, at this moment must there not be an infinite number of Max's chatting with an infinite number of Dales…….etc
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 11:04 am
I think everyone here would benefit from a healthy dose of "I really do not know...and there is almost no unambiguous evidence that warrants a guess of one way or the other."

Fact is, the topic is so interesting...so compelling...it is almost impossible not to want to hazard a guess, but it would not be inappropriate to consider that almost every guess would be a nearly blind guess.

It also might be worth considering that the answer to these types of questions may be way, way, way beyond the ability of humans on planet Earth to come even close to answering. The planet Earth is a rock circling a rather common star in a relatively common kind of galaxy. Our galaxy has an estimated 200 billion other stars (with many being born and destroyed as we discuss)...and there are over a hundred billion galaxies that we know of.

Unless this really is about "let's make blind guesses", a healthy dose would be a wise move.
tomr
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 08:45 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
It's very difficult to understand how it could have been a result of a Big Bang which could never reach infinite volume


It does seem odd that space increasing from the big bang event could after a finite amount of time become infinite. I think that if we took the case where there is infinite mass in the singularity then it might work out. Since space is increasing between particles as the universe expands, and there are infinite particles, we could conclude the volume would be infinite after a finite amount of time.

Quote:
Again I'm not a proponent of infinity and in fact as I asserted above somewhere, it's my subliminal objection to the idea of identical galaxies that somehow rejects the notion


I go back and forth on the idea of infinity as something that is apart of objective reality. The concept is definitely useful in mathematics and science.

Quote:
Tom you have to explain that. I presume by "twin galaxies" you mean them identical but I thought we had already agreed that with interacting fields they couldn't be


I meant identical in appearance to an observer in one of the twin galaxies (galaxies that are either identical or very very near identical).

Is there a reason you chose a galaxy as the requirement for identicalness? What about a human being, could infinite identical human beings be created? Or infinite identical meteorites. To me these seem more likely to be identical since they are smaller. But these too could not be isolated from the fields of surrounding objects.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 08:58 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
You are making the flawed assumption that infinite space and matter equals infinite "attempts" (I am assuming that you are envisioning reality as a bunch of equal dice roles).

Not as flawed as you think.


maxdancona wrote:
I have already given a mathematical counter example...

1) The number line of integers is infinite (i.e. the are an infinite number of integers).
2) Only one integer (in the infinite number of integers ) is two.

Yes. And my response was:

There is a difference though between "numbers" and "possibilities".
Yes, you can count forever. But that does not mean that there are infinite possibilities.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 09:00 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

...What was created 14+ billions of years ago is WHAT WE CALL the universe. We do not know if it actually is the universe...or just a tiny speck in the universe.

True, but they do know a lot more than you probably think they do. They know that it is the entire universe in the ordinary sense of all the time and space to which we are directly connected. The bottom line is this, this is Physics, and speculations about Physics without knowing Physics are worthless.
0 Replies
 
tomr
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jun, 2013 09:01 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Is it okay to take cases and draw conclusions from a particular case? For instance, assume the case of a universe that begins with a big bang. Then make other assumptions like there is infinite mass at the singularity. And go from there. We need not actually guess if that is the reality but just think through the consequences of particular assumptions. I think there is merit in this type of thinking.
I am trying to not commit to too many ideas. You make me self conscious of my belief system. I am catching the disease.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Wed 26 Jun, 2013 04:09 am
@tomr,
tomr wrote:

Is it okay to take cases and draw conclusions from a particular case? For instance, assume the case of a universe that begins with a big bang. Then make other assumptions like there is infinite mass at the singularity. And go from there. We need not actually guess if that is the reality but just think through the consequences of particular assumptions. I think there is merit in this type of thinking.
I am trying to not commit to too many ideas. You make me self conscious of my belief system. I am catching the disease.


Any guesses are valid guesses...and no science would ever get done if guesses were not made. Whether one can actually "draw conclusions" has to be handled on a case by case basis. Most often...questions being used to do science lead to more questions...and to possible conclusions that shape the "more questions."

When it comes to the particular you cited, however, it becomes so large a problem that almost any conclusion is actually just another guess. Even you can probably pick out the guess features of the "assumptions."

There IS merit in making the guesses. There is potential danger in considering the guesses to be conclusions. Unless they are tautologies.

Or so it seems to me.
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jun, 2013 10:44 am
@tomr,
Quote:
Since space is increasing between particles as the universe expands, and there are infinite particles, we could conclude the volume would be infinite after a finite amount of time.
Wow Tom, that's 'way beyond me but even so, still sounds fishy

Quote:
I go back and forth on the idea of infinity as something that is apart of objective reality. The concept is definitely useful in mathematics and science.
suppose so; but the idea of all those Dales and Toms somehow engenders doubt

Quote:
Is there a reason you chose a galaxy as the requirement for identicalness?
Purely arbitrary

Quote:
Tom you have to explain that. I presume by "twin galaxies" you mean them identical but I thought we had already agreed that with interacting fields they couldn't be


Quote:
I meant identical in appearance to an observer in one of the twin galaxies (galaxies that are either identical or very very near identical).
I'd suppose that if they were close enough together that they could see each other, the similarity might be quite a surprise but they couldn't be identical given the interacting fields


Quote:
What about a human being, could infinite identical human beings be created?
That's my q. Given an analog Universe perhaps not. But as I said before we could have an infinite number of galaxies so nearly identical that the difference is not detectable

Quote:
Or infinite identical meteorites.
Infinite numbers of identical anything, in steps of maybe one quantum

Quote:
To me these seem more likely to be identical since they are smaller.
Meaning there would be more of such identical rocks within a given volume of space. But still given an infinite number of such volumes…..

Quote:
But these too could not be isolated from the fields of surrounding objects.
Yes that's a point that has long bothered me too; although it doesn't rule out objects so nearly identical as to be indistinguishable


Still nobody has satisfactorily addressed the basic q and that is, how nearly identical could two or more objects become in my infinite Universe, and I think the answer lies in "the math of infinity" (whatever that means)
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Jul, 2013 08:45 am
@dalehileman,
This thread may have been entitled "Identity Revisited."
Possibly the best criterion for theoretical validity is "usefulness" Superior even to "truth" which is too problematical.
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Jul, 2013 11:59 am
@JLNobody,
JL I"m not entirely sure about that. If you review my OP you'll see that the problem is not how things are but purely one of math

That is, briefly, given an infinite Universe whether anything that can happen, will happen, and if so, whether simultaneously
0 Replies
 
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Infinity revisited
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/11/2020 at 09:31:44