41

**New Theories / Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe**

« **on:**09/01/2019 12:00:28 »

What are numbers? What is finite or *infinite?

To us, they're both concepts, but when we apply these concepts to the universe, they take on a different meaning. It's very important to understand their meaning, precisely.

In math, a finite number is a static or fixed value, like 0 or 1. An infinite value is marked by continual change, like pi, for example. That's how we immediately differentiate finite from infinite numerically and mathematically in the real world. Finite is the absence of change in a value mathematically. Infinite is the constancy of change in a value mathematically. Whether you're counting or calculating, continual change defines infinity, and the absence of change in value defines finite.

When I look at the classic or accepted mathematical definition of infinity, I don't know what it has to do with how we identify it in reality. It's defined as a number, greater than any number that can ever be reached. Some sort of imaginary number, I suppose. I won't ever see this as the correct definition, because it's not grounded in the reality of how we differentiate finite from infinite numbers. I don't even see the current definition as reality. It's a contrived definition that doesn't align with the physical reality of how we differentiate finite and infinite numbers. The current definition doesn't physically mean anything. It's completely abstract or imaginary. It is literally, meaningless.

One of the greatest questions asked about the universe is whether we are finite or infinite. Understanding the true meaning of finite and infinite is crucial in making a determination of what the physical universe is, because it's no longer about numeric values. Infinite and finite become potential states of the universe. It's a greater meaning than just numbers. It's what we are, and answers a significant question about our reality. Do we leave it in the hands of an imaginary number, or base it on the physical reality we clearly understand and see with our own two eyes, change?

There's been quite a bit of controversy in the way I apply numbers to the universe, and the relevance of our physical numbering system and how that applies to the universe. I'd like to set the record straight on this point.

Technically, we only need two finite integers to perform all of our math. 0 and 1. Sure, we'd lose a lot of short cuts, like squaring or cubing in a formula, but technically, all math can be performed within the space of 0 to 1. Obviously wouldn't be a pleasant process. Not something we would want to do, but everything we need is there. We could literally replace our entire numbering concept with the decimals that lie between 0 and 1.

Math is the art of reducing variables. The universe is obviously following mathematics. The universe obviously doesn't need math, because it is simply behaving in a manner consistent with our mathematics. The universe also doesn't need our numbering system, because it can do everything it does within the space of 0 to 1, without performing a single calculation. It just behaves that way, naturally.

As I said, math is the art of reducing variables. There's one thing you may or may not have noticed above. Math requires two finite integers, minimum. 0 and 1. So, when applying number values to the universe, 0 and 1 become a requirement, because without them, our universe couldn't behave mathematically.

Looking at 0, it's pretty easy to apply to the universe as a potential state. 0 is the absence of everything, including physical dimension. 0 is also considered a natural finite and absolute value. It's also a state that lacks both space and time. The closest thing we have to a definition of 0 in physics is absolute 0. We see this as theoretically impossible. I would have to agree, seeing as we're here. No, the universe is not in a 0 state. The potential is there.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with the above paragraph. To me, the significance of being able to apply 0 to the universe is very important in our understanding, because it is potentially a physical reality. The entire universe could be defined as 0, if it could ever reach that state. One finite and absolute value could be an entire definition for the universe. That's as real as it gets numerically and mathematically. A null state of the universe defined by a finite and absolute number value of 0.

To me, I see it as the first indication as to why the universe is following mathematics. But, as we see from above, we also need to close the loop, because math requires a second finite integer, bare minimum. 0 needs a comparison value to have any meaning. 0 needs a 1.

I will continue this portion of the discussion later, and leave it stet for now. You gotta eat!

To us, they're both concepts, but when we apply these concepts to the universe, they take on a different meaning. It's very important to understand their meaning, precisely.

In math, a finite number is a static or fixed value, like 0 or 1. An infinite value is marked by continual change, like pi, for example. That's how we immediately differentiate finite from infinite numerically and mathematically in the real world. Finite is the absence of change in a value mathematically. Infinite is the constancy of change in a value mathematically. Whether you're counting or calculating, continual change defines infinity, and the absence of change in value defines finite.

When I look at the classic or accepted mathematical definition of infinity, I don't know what it has to do with how we identify it in reality. It's defined as a number, greater than any number that can ever be reached. Some sort of imaginary number, I suppose. I won't ever see this as the correct definition, because it's not grounded in the reality of how we differentiate finite from infinite numbers. I don't even see the current definition as reality. It's a contrived definition that doesn't align with the physical reality of how we differentiate finite and infinite numbers. The current definition doesn't physically mean anything. It's completely abstract or imaginary. It is literally, meaningless.

One of the greatest questions asked about the universe is whether we are finite or infinite. Understanding the true meaning of finite and infinite is crucial in making a determination of what the physical universe is, because it's no longer about numeric values. Infinite and finite become potential states of the universe. It's a greater meaning than just numbers. It's what we are, and answers a significant question about our reality. Do we leave it in the hands of an imaginary number, or base it on the physical reality we clearly understand and see with our own two eyes, change?

There's been quite a bit of controversy in the way I apply numbers to the universe, and the relevance of our physical numbering system and how that applies to the universe. I'd like to set the record straight on this point.

Technically, we only need two finite integers to perform all of our math. 0 and 1. Sure, we'd lose a lot of short cuts, like squaring or cubing in a formula, but technically, all math can be performed within the space of 0 to 1. Obviously wouldn't be a pleasant process. Not something we would want to do, but everything we need is there. We could literally replace our entire numbering concept with the decimals that lie between 0 and 1.

Math is the art of reducing variables. The universe is obviously following mathematics. The universe obviously doesn't need math, because it is simply behaving in a manner consistent with our mathematics. The universe also doesn't need our numbering system, because it can do everything it does within the space of 0 to 1, without performing a single calculation. It just behaves that way, naturally.

As I said, math is the art of reducing variables. There's one thing you may or may not have noticed above. Math requires two finite integers, minimum. 0 and 1. So, when applying number values to the universe, 0 and 1 become a requirement, because without them, our universe couldn't behave mathematically.

Looking at 0, it's pretty easy to apply to the universe as a potential state. 0 is the absence of everything, including physical dimension. 0 is also considered a natural finite and absolute value. It's also a state that lacks both space and time. The closest thing we have to a definition of 0 in physics is absolute 0. We see this as theoretically impossible. I would have to agree, seeing as we're here. No, the universe is not in a 0 state. The potential is there.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with the above paragraph. To me, the significance of being able to apply 0 to the universe is very important in our understanding, because it is potentially a physical reality. The entire universe could be defined as 0, if it could ever reach that state. One finite and absolute value could be an entire definition for the universe. That's as real as it gets numerically and mathematically. A null state of the universe defined by a finite and absolute number value of 0.

To me, I see it as the first indication as to why the universe is following mathematics. But, as we see from above, we also need to close the loop, because math requires a second finite integer, bare minimum. 0 needs a comparison value to have any meaning. 0 needs a 1.

I will continue this portion of the discussion later, and leave it stet for now. You gotta eat!

***Please keep in mind,**my definition of infinity is different from Googles definition, and this may confuse some people who lack the ability to think logically or independently, or are devoid of any critical thought. My definition is pretty straight forward. Infinite=constancy of change. Where this could differ significantly is things like pi. Anyone holding fast to the old definition set in the year 1650, would not consider pi infinite. They may even go through the bother of posting a message, pointing out that my definition is wrong, because 4 is greater than pi. Even more bizarre, they may even suggest I stop posting, because apparently, Google holds the key to the universe. Not sure. To be clear, my definition correctly encompasses all non resolvable's under the blanket of infinity, as they would take an infinite amount of time to resolve, while the value of the whole would be changing continuously over that time span. I tossed out the imaginary, and inserted reality. Change is hard for some people, even in 2019 apparently.