disproving infinity paradoxes; Hilbert’s Hotel?

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by _Z_

tao, hi



do you not think that a universal principle is universally applicable? for instance, balance; there would always be a polarity [2 {number attribute}], if not then only oneness remains and nothing can evolve. whatever form that takes it would still belong to the same set of principles concerning the duel natures.

The duality of fundamental structure does appear to be everywhere. As we were discussing on another thread on dimensions we have to be careful about taking it for granted that the of the laws of our 4D universe are truly universally applicable. It would seem however that some must be, duality perhaps foremost amongst them.

perhaps an infinite universe may happen at once with all things happening timelessly,but any universe in time would i feel evolve and thence have all the universal attributes of the numbers.

I think the hardest concept to ever get my head around was being able to discount time as an illusion. And that is what I believe it to be now and apply it to all my thinking on such matters. Our universe is a constituent part in the multiverse which is infinite and without time. What we perceive as time is not the actual passage of moments but an expression of infinity. Every moment exists eternally somewhere in infinity. And you do not have to expend time (which doesn't exist anyway) to go from any point to any other point. What we see as passing time is a conveyor belt of expressions put in enough order for them to make sense to us. Evolution is the expression of potential/certainty within the infinite. Potentials/certainties are clumped together, again giving the illusion to us that there is progression/evolution in a linear manner but in the infinite all potentials are already realities. So time cannot exist except as a frame of reference.

sounds interesting! i would like to test such minds, can you elaborate with any specific ideas?

A good place to start would be Boltzmann's ideas on entropy and probability which figured high in forming his beliefs on the nature of infinity. But be careful he, and several more scientists, ended up going insane getting his head round it all. I am ok tho, I was already mad to start with

zero can never exist, it cannot be infinitely real. i would say that no comparative or transient state can be infinite, yet we can have infinite transience [where transience itself is eternal]?!

Zero can exist as a point of reference. Transience is an illusion within eternity we are required to invent to make sense of it all.

chaos and randomness are tricky, you can make a simple program to produce a ‘random’ result, yet this would always be within the perimeters of that program, even if they are continually changing. infinite chaos would be impossible - if i may, for similar reasons as in the opening post. we would still be up against 'limits' versus the 'unlimited', chaos is simply limits that are continually changing without fully taking shape. similarly the universe is chaos that does take shape - or at least appears to - and this is transience. perhaps the only difference is that chaos is not governed.

Infinity is BIG!! There is space for everything


Tao

[_Z_]

tao

we have to be careful about taking it for granted that the of the laws of our 4D universe are truly universally applicable

true yes - good point. i don’t know what difference dimension make other than unto themselves [i.e. the 4D remains as it is]. however we should indeed recognise that all things are limited.

‘universal’ can have so many meanings yet refers to limits, with duality being a good example of that. however, how i see is that to be truly universal everything has to link to everything - one principle to another as one thing to another - with the result being non specific. that is to say that there is no overall limit, duality is linked to transience which links to the infinite etc.
its kinda like the universe has no definable edges as don’t all things within it including meanings, then the shape of the universe is a result of its overall universality.

the hardest concept to ever get my head around was being able to discount time as an illusion

me to - and i still don’t get it at all. illusions always have a reality to them! time is perhaps simply a result of things changing and those changes could be completely random, then it just so happens that they appear to have order for a while and we call part of that time.
however; ‘as soon as we try do define time as an illusion, we tend to loose reality’. i.e. any idea of illusory time becomes nonsensical.
What we perceive as time is not the actual passage of moments but an expression of infinity

infinity i would think cannot be expressed!? universality can be and that links to infinity so things can be given potential infinity. i.e. be open ended. that is not the same as actually being infinity or an expression of.

Zero can exist as a point of reference. Transience is an illusion within eternity we are required to invent to make sense of it all.

well put.

thanks
_Z_

[Tao_Equus]

Hi _Z_ and thanks for your reply

Originally Posted by _Z_

‘universal’ can have so many meanings yet refers to limits, with duality being a good example of that. however, how i see is that to be truly universal everything has to link to everything ......



..... illusions always have a reality to them! time is perhaps simply a result of things changing and those changes could be completely random, then it just so happens that they appear to have order for a while and we call part of that time.


infinity i would think cannot be expressed!?

They way I look at it each "moment" is a universe too. Imagine each moment/universe stacked side by side like they were books on a library shelf. The Librarian is meticulous in keeping related works in the correct order and so we find the closest moment/universes placed either side of our current one. As we jump from one book to the next to the next we perceive it as time, but time does not pass because these moments remain where they were, static and unchanging. I see each moment/universe as an expression of infinity, or slightly more accurately of probability. For me Infinity is expressed as probabilities.

Regards

Tao

[_Z_]

For me Infinity is expressed as probabilities.

this is where we are imagining infinity as an ‘infinite amount of things’ and hence there is infinite potential. however there is only potentially an infinite amount of things not an actual infinite amount of things. perhaps probability is simply a part of transience, as the square becomes a circle it has the potential of the circle within it kinda thing.

in the main i would ask is infinity active in any way - how would you see this? all it has to be is present to have an effect, this is how i see the universal ‘it’ too and also mathematical cycles [e.g. of universal astrology].

Imagine each moment/universe stacked side by side like they were books on a library shelf. The Librarian is meticulous in keeping related works in the correct order and so we find the closest moment/universes placed either side of our current one.

interesting way to put it! what happens when you start to phase those books gradually from one to another? imagine a planet in one moment then that same planet a moment later, yet a nano second before there would also be a planet [i.e. between apparent moments]! how would the molecular structures and forces of each entity cope with each other?

secondly, zeno’s paradox comes to mind - do we have an infinite amount of planets between each book in the library of time? [which would create an infinity paradox of course]

thanks

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Using the example listed above, one can see that infinite does not necessarily mean 'all.' That is where the fallacy is.

Same here. Not always all or every or full. And there are limitations to that which is infinite just as there are different limitations to that which is finite. It must be somewhere in the middle where infinite meets finite.

Another one I have considered is eternity as with no beginning and no end- we think of as infinite in different ways. Eternity can also have a beginnning while having no end, a starting point and goes infinite in one direction or that is how it appears to me for now.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Bandit

Same here. Not always all or every or full. And there are limitations to that which is infinite just as there are different limitations to that which is finite. It must be somewhere in the middle where infinite meets finite.

Another one I have considered is eternity as with no beginning and no end- we think of as infinite in different ways. Eternity can also have a beginnning while having no end, a starting point and goes infinite in one direction or that is how it appears to me for now.

Undefined limit, then? Something {or no thing} that's not set?
Along the lines of:

The Tao that can be understood cannot be the primal, or cosmic, Tao, just as an idea that can be expressed in words cannot be the infinite idea.
And yet this ineffable Tao was the source of all spirit and matter, and being expressed was the mother of all created things.
Therefore not to desire the things of sense is to know the freedom of spirituality; and to desire is to learn the limitation of matter. These two things spirit and matter, so different in nature, have the same origin. This unity of origin is the mystery of mysteries, but it is the gateway to spirituality.
-source-

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Undefined limit, then? Something {or no thing} that's not set?
Along the lines of:

The Tao that can be understood cannot be the primal, or cosmic, Tao, just as an idea that can be expressed in words cannot be the infinite idea.

And yet this ineffable Tao was the source of all spirit and matter, and being expressed was the mother of all created things.

Therefore not to desire the things of sense is to know the freedom of spirituality; and to desire is to learn the limitation of matter. These two things spirit and matter, so different in nature, have the same origin. This unity of origin is the mystery of mysteries, but it is the gateway to spirituality.

-source-

Exactly. The unity of origin is the gateway. It could have a starting point but does not always have to have one, at least in the sense that we can fathom. If it were to be expressed in words then I suppose the words and expressions should have an undefined limit. Not exactly the same as going around in the same circle but many different circles interlocking at times?

These two things spirit and matter, so different in nature, have the same origin.

This Tao is Hot and mighty! It works all the way through with the scriptures too
It is neat how it kind of flip flops around and back and forth yet has no defined limit. Part of it could be set, I think as in (unity of origin), but the whole of it going out into many directions or just one direction does not have to be set.

Do you think matter itself could also be seen as infinite as spirit is? For example; offspring- as the seed always falls back to the ground and reproduces itself and where do those cycles end or begin? The kernels/seed do not die though the parent will die, the parent that which was first lives on through the offspring with no end. I doubt anyone knows for sure...not yet. Maybe an atomic explosion can end and begin it? just kidding

[juantoo3]

BANDIT!!!

What a pleasant surprise to see you back around!

[Bandit]

Hey juantoo3

Likewise.

[john_jeffrey]

as an aside, the universe can't be infinite if it has a beginning. if the big bang is correct, and the universe is about 15.2 billion years old, then at best the diameter is 15.2 billion light-years at most since nothing can go faster than light. so if the universe's diameter is no more than 15.2 billion ly, 15.2 billion years old, it's hardly infinite. alternately, any finite unit (as a universe with approx age is,) can't be infinite. it'd be a contradiction.

[Tao_Equus]

Indeed..
It is part of the reason i consider the Big Bang a local event.

Tao

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by john_jeffrey

as an aside, the universe can't be infinite if it has a beginning. if the big bang is correct, and the universe is about 15.2 billion years old, then at best the diameter is 15.2 billion light-years at most since nothing can go faster than light. so if the universe's diameter is no more than 15.2 billion ly, 15.2 billion years old, it's hardly infinite. alternately, any finite unit (as a universe with approx age is,) can't be infinite. it'd be a contradiction.

Originally Posted by Tao

It is part of the reason i consider the Big Bang a local event.

What would you call 20 billion light years out at the present time? Or 50 billion years out? Could there be another universe out there? Perhaps on a path to converge with ours? What would happen if they did?

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by Dondi

What would you call 20 billion light years out at the present time? Or 50 billion years out? Could there be another universe out there? Perhaps on a path to converge with ours? What would happen if they did?

I call local all that we are able to observe from Earth. In some respects I think science can be like religion. The scientists try to fit what they observe into a totality that works and makes sense. Just like a preacher will have some reason why a ridiculous line in some holy book has good purpose. There are stars out there that by spectrographic analysis reveal themselves to be much older than the Big Bang universe itself. How can this be?
I believe there was a Big Bang event in an already extant universe. The cause is unknown but the "brane theory" explanation of two parallel universes colliding is as good a guess as anyones. That answers your questions I think but....
There are many events that could happen, that may already have happened, that could wipe all life on Earth out. The luck that life evolved on Earth to this degree is quite phenomenal given what a hostile place the universe is. A peaceful sun parked safely on the outer edge of a spiral arm of a benign, sedate galaxy like ours, with a planet in that goldilocks zone with a moon just the right size and distance to drive tectonics. No nearby erratic or dangerous stars to threaten the peace. It may not be a unique combination but surely its very rare. But even then an average size meteorite wandering through the solar system and hitting us could wipe us all out, if made of anti-matter it could annihilate the planet altogether... give the sun a second asteroid belt. Or, as there is evidence for, the supermassive black hole at the core of the milky way could fart. Shoot of a jet of super high energy particles that would devastate us.

In the end creation and destruction are two sides of the same thing. I think the idea of all the mass/energy we see in the universe coming essentially from nothing just stupid. And Big Bang theory still holds to this. I do not believe for a second what we see and think we understand is yet even scratching the surface of the totality.

Tao

[Bruno's logic]

"If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would be seen as it is, infinite." (William Blake)

"It must certainly be allowed, that nature has kept us at a great distance from all her secrets, and has afforded us only the knowledge of a few superficial qualities of objects; while she conceals from us those powers and principles on which the influence of those objects entirely depends." (Hume, 1737)

"A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty… The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. … We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive." -(Albert Einstein, 1954)

One must take a leap of faith to believe in infinity because the very nature of infinity is that of no boundaries, no beginning, no end. I believe that there can be only one infinte thing existing as the source of, everything else, that seemingly comes and goes in and out of existence.The Universe we exist in and are a part of is the biggest thing we can conceive of (I think of it as our womb) but I believe that there are an infinite quantity of universes in the infinite realm of existence.
That's what infinity is to me, an endless substance that permeates everything, everywhere, it always has and it always will. Infinity had no beginning.

We exist within this infinite substance and are of this infinite substance. I can't prove it but I believe in one infinity existing. That means that I am infinite too. I'm not sure why or how because my perception is not clear but I believe this anyway.
-G

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by _Z_

disproving infinity paradoxes; Hilbert’s Hotel?

i thought i would have a crack at this ole chesnut, see what you think?
here’s the infinite-hotel puzzle (also known as "Hilbert’s Hotel"); In a hotel containing infinitely many rooms, all of which are full, how do you find room for infinitely many new guests? Simply move every guest to the room with twice the number - room 1 moves to room 2, room 2 to room 4, 3 to 6, and so on - and then all the odd-numbered rooms are free.
however, every room is ‘full’? what we are dealing with here is a problem of spaces and occupations, we can move a guest out of a given room to the next to create room. however if each room is full - literally - let us say that you have an infinite amount of rooms and each is filled with a wooden block the size of the room, then you cannot move any of the occupants to anew room! the puzzle then is simply set on unsound foundations, we are dealing with finite amount being moved around an infinite amount of locations.
secondly, we cannot have an infinite amount of rooms, this is the same as having an infinite amount of numbers - we cannot, we may keep counting all we like yet never get any closer to an infinite amount.
this and other arguments may be used to show how we cannot have an infinitely cyclic universe, and how we cannot this universe or any given limited energy entity as infinite in any way! this implies that we cannot have an infinite amount of universes too.
------------------ ---------------------- -------------------------
god and infinity, or nirvana perhaps?

i am beginning to think that there is a parallel between the notion of where i am heading here [1] and a rather more ancient one [2]:
1. infinity is incomparative - for me this is one of life’s great truths.
2. "no that he is never in anything" a reference to god and his separateness from the created world.
many people especially in medieval times, have associated god and infinity, do you,and how do you connect them? and would you think this is appropriate? or would you separate god from infinity.

Hi Z,
Space is not infinite.
How many Angels can you fit on the head of a pin?
All of them!

Greetings,
Br.Bruce