The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 17   Go Down

An Argument for an Infinite Universe

  • 331 Replies
  • 25981 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #200 on: 06/01/2019 13:47:13 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 13:18:02
I noticed a pattern in the numbers.

0<≈<1∞<2<∞<3<∞<4<∞<5<∞<6<∞<7<∞<8<∞<9.....
It's not a real pattern.
You made it up, and it's gibberish.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #201 on: 06/01/2019 13:55:26 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 13:44:46
    0<∞<1 is a mathematical truth.

No.
It is not.

Once again, you are wrong.  There is an infinite number of values between 0 and 1.  Our base 10 numbering system creates a logic loop, nothing more.  We invented numbers. 

Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 13:44:46
or you are wrong.
Which of those possibilities is more likely?
Do you really think you are cleverer than everyone else who has considered this  topic before?

The fact that's it's a possibility at all proves me right.

Do you think you're more clever than anyone else is the real question...

I'm just an average guy who refuses to believe much of anything until I understand it on my own terms. 

The fact is, you lost this debate, and now you're just being a troll, by definition.   

Unless of course, you can prove 0<∞<1 is mathematically false. 
Logged
 

Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #202 on: 06/01/2019 13:58:41 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 13:47:13
    I noticed a pattern in the numbers.

    0<≈<1∞<2<∞<3<∞<4<∞<5<∞<6<∞<7<∞<8<∞<9.....

It's not a real pattern.

Once again, you are wrong.  It's a logic loop.  Count all the fractions between 0 and 1, and get back to me when you're finished.
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #203 on: 06/01/2019 14:07:44 »
I already explained the mistake you are making there
Quote from: Bored chemist on 30/12/2018 13:54:54
No.

There are an infinite number of values between 0 and 1.
That is not the same as saying that infinity is in that range.
It is clearly bigger.

Do you not understand it?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #204 on: 06/01/2019 14:15:33 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 13:58:41
Count all the fractions between 0 and 1, and get back to me when you're finished.
OK,
Counting things is a matter of putting them in a 1 to 1 correspondence with the integers and seeing how far you get.

And there's a method for ordering the fractions between 0 and 1
so they can be counted.
This explains it
https://www.askamathematician.com/2011/03/q-how-do-you-talk-about-the-size-of-infinity-how-can-one-infinity-be-bigger-than-another/

There are a much bigger number of numbers between 0 and 1 than there are integers between 0 and infinity.
Not all infinite sets are countable, but the fractions are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number

Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #205 on: 06/01/2019 14:32:40 »
We created a logic loop in our base 10 numbering system, which yes, unbelievably, we didn't notice.  The universe doesn't care about our numbering system.  As I said, we could repeat 10 letters of the alphabet with a different grunt between each cycle, and it would logically be the same equivalent of counting.  Math is about reducing variables.  We added an infinite number of variables when we created our base 10 numbering system.  It made it easier for us to count logically, rather than using fractions of the whole.  You know, a piece of pie, rather than a .125 slice of pie from the whole.  The latter being a mouthful.

You know this is mathematically correct.  It's a fact, not fiction.

0<∞<1
   
You may not like it, but it is a mathematical truth.  There exist an infinite number of decimals between 0 and 1.  To make things easier, we shifted the decimal place to the right and created a set of integers called our base 10 numbering system.   We zoomed in on the fractions. 

The universe is either 0, or Ι1Ι, in terms of finite values.  We are everything else in between 0 and Ι1Ι, because we are a fraction of the whole.  The whole being greater than its parts. 

The universe is infinite.
« Last Edit: 06/01/2019 14:38:27 by andreasva »
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #206 on: 06/01/2019 14:51:20 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 14:32:40
We created a logic loop in our base 10 numbering system
No we didn't.
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 14:32:40
You know this is mathematically correct.  It's a fact, not fiction.

0<∞<1
Well, it's not fact.
It's just nonsense.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #207 on: 06/01/2019 15:16:43 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 14:51:20
Well, it's not fact.
It's just nonsense.

Says you.

Like I said, when you get done counting the decimals between 0 and 1, get back with me.

0<∞<1 is mathematically and logically true

We created a repeating logic loop. 
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5715
  • Activity:
    86%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #208 on: 06/01/2019 15:16:59 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 14:32:40
You know this is mathematically correct.  It's a fact, not fiction.

0<∞<1

Have you tried pushing this on a mathematics forum? Or sending it to mathematicians? If what you have is really a proof, then those well-versed in theorems and the like should be pretty easy to convince.
Logged
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #209 on: 06/01/2019 16:05:14 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 15:16:43
Like I said, when you get done counting the decimals between 0 and 1, get back with me.
I did.
Unfortunately, you didn't understand it.

Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 15:16:43
We created a repeating logic loop. 
No
You have created a loop on non-logic.
You keep on making the same laughable statement, even though I have explained why it's wrong.
And then you just say it again.

Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #210 on: 06/01/2019 16:10:24 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 15:16:43
Says you.
Well, says me and others here.
Whereas you are the only one on your side.
You might want to think about that.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #211 on: 06/01/2019 17:26:28 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 16:10:24
Well, says me and others here.
Whereas you are the only one on your side.
You might want to think about that.

If the number of people had any relevance to something being right or wrong, we'd all be in church today.

The fact remains:

0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 

Like I said, when you get finished counting the finite numbers that lie between 0 and 1, get back with me.

Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #212 on: 06/01/2019 18:10:03 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 17:26:28
The fact remains:

0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 
It's logically valid.
But it is plainly wrong.

Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 17:26:28
Like I said, when you get finished counting the finite numbers that lie between 0 and 1, get back with me.
Actually, that's not the question you asked me earlier.
You asked about the fractions.
The fact that you don't recognise the difference shows that you don't understand  the maths of infinite numbers.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #213 on: 06/01/2019 19:14:39 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 18:10:03
    The fact remains:

    0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 

It's logically valid.

Exactly.

Infinity is not a number, and can only be understood logically. 

Infinity is analog, not digital. 

Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 18:10:03
Actually, that's not the question you asked me earlier.
You asked about the fractions.
The fact that you don't recognise the difference shows that you don't understand  the maths of infinite numbers.

The math of infinite numbers is a logical definition for values that are too great to be expressed individually in a finite manner, because it would take an infinite amount of time to do so. 

Logic had to be used to define infinite sets. 
« Last Edit: 06/01/2019 19:29:50 by andreasva »
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #214 on: 06/01/2019 19:24:03 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 19:14:39
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 18:10:03
    The fact remains:

    0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 

It's logically valid.

Exactly.

Infinity is not a number, and can only be understood logically. 

Infinity is analog, not digital. 
You didn't understand.
It's only "a valid logical expression in mathematics" in the same way that
2+2=5 is a valid logical expression in mathematics. 
It's logically valid- the syntax works just fine.

But it's stupidly wrong.
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 19:14:39
Infinity is analog, not digital. 
That's word salad.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #215 on: 06/01/2019 19:37:30 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 19:24:03
It's only "a valid logical expression in mathematics" in the same way that
2+2=5 is a valid logical expression in mathematics.
It's logically valid- the syntax works just fine.

No, 2+2=5 is an invalid logical expression in mathematics.

0<∞<1 is a valid logical expression in mathematics.

It's perfectly fine to show that there is an infinite number of decimals places between 0 and 1 in this manner.

You just don't like it. 
« Last Edit: 06/01/2019 19:40:13 by andreasva »
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #216 on: 06/01/2019 19:45:25 »
No
There are an infinite number of fractions between 0 and 1
That is (still) not the same as saying that infinity is between 0 and 1.
You really need to understand that so you can make progress.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline andreasva (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 252
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #217 on: 06/01/2019 19:59:05 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 06/01/2019 19:45:25
That is (still) not the same as saying that infinity is between 0 and 1.
You really need to understand that so you can make progress.

What I understand is that our inability to count infinitely doesn't in any way mean anything to the universe.  The universe couldn't care less about 2, or 3, or any concept of an infinite number as concocted by us.  The universe is simple.

Man creates the complexity.

Like I said, we could repeat 10 letters of the alphabet with a different grunt between cycles, and that is the logical equivalent of counting.  Our inability to count indefinitely due to time doesn't mean anything to the universe, and most certainly doesn't help us understand it. 

 
« Last Edit: 06/01/2019 23:30:57 by andreasva »
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #218 on: 06/01/2019 20:46:55 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 19:59:05
Like I said, we could repeat 10 letters of the alphabet with a different grunt between cycles,
What do you think you mean by "cycles" here?
It doesn't make sense.
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 19:59:05
Our inability to count indefinitely due to time doesn't mean anything to the universe, and most certainly doesn't help us understand it. 
Nobody said it did.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 21923
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 508 times
    • View Profile
Re: An Argument for an Infinite Universe
« Reply #219 on: 06/01/2019 20:50:34 »
Quote from: andreasva on 06/01/2019 19:59:05
The universe could care less about 2,
The universe doesn't care about anything (and, btw, the phrase is "couldn't care less"- think about it).
However, in this universe, we have, for example, planets in reasonably stable orbits.
That doesn't work unless the force of gravity falls with distance in inverse proportion to that distance raised to the power 2.
No other number works.
So, the universe is somewhere where 2 is really important.

Facts like that get in the way of your absurd idea that only 1 matters.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 17   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.18 seconds with 77 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.