What are the implications of an infinite large universe?

[Bradskii]

No. God is both eternal and infinite. To claim matter is infinite is to take it outside of the realm of science. We can't fully comprehend timelessness. But why would time exist at all for an eternal being?

You're the one that said God is infinite. If you have a problem with the conclusions I drew from that then let's address them.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

As I said previously, there are no unbounded sets of real numbers. Real numbers are finite numbers. A set of real numbers is always a finite set.

The definition of real numbers excludes a finite set from being an infinite set.

The first bound is zero and the other bound is one. That is a bounded set of real numbers.

The infinite is described as unbounded.

you are confusing finite interval ie the bounds with the number of elements (real numbers) in this finite interval, back to a decent HS for you.

 

[klutedavid]

you are confusing finite interval ie the bounds with the number of elements (real numbers) in this finite interval, back to a decent HS for you.

Are you saying that if, you have enough finite numbers, then you can have an infinite amount of finite numbers?

That is a paradox.

Infinite: without bounds, limitless.

Infinite is valueless, it is not a number, does not appear on a number line. No graph tends towards a point regarded as infinite.

Consider these two finite numbers.

0.1

0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

Neither real number is any closer to some unknown point called the infinite point.

Consider any number of real numbers in any set you wish. The set will always be a finite set and no matter how large a set you can imagine.

 

[renniks]

You're the one that said God is infinite. If you have a problem with the conclusions I drew from that then let's address them.

I thought we were.

 

[SelfSim]

No. God is both eternal and infinite. To claim matter is infinite is to take it outside of the realm of science. We can't fully comprehend timelessness. But why would time exist at all for an eternal being?

i) God is both eternal and infinite;
ii) God is a being;
iii) Beings are comprised of matter;
iv) Therefore, matter is infinite and eternal.

Otherwise, stop using our meaning for the concept of a 'being'!
(Because its just muddying the waters and confusing the conversation .. Get clear about what you mean!)

 

[Bradskii]

I thought we were.

No, you simply said that time wouldn't exist for God. But you said that He's infinite. That's a contradiction. Infinite doesn't mean to exist outside of time. It means to exist for all time. So from there, where does the argument break down?

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Are you saying that if, you have enough finite numbers, then you can have an infinite amount of finite numbers?

That is a paradox.

Infinite: without bounds, limitless.

Infinite is valueless, it is not a number, does not appear on a number line. No graph tends towards a point regarded as infinite.

Consider these two finite numbers.

0.1

0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

Neither real number is any closer to some unknown point called the infinite point.

Consider any number of real numbers in any set you wish. The set will always be a finite set and no matter how large a set you can imagine.

Yup
Nope
Agreed
Infinity is not a value number on the real number line since you have not reached it. Graphs as representations of mathematical equations often tend towards infinity.
Considered.
the first is considered to be closer to +infinity though only infinitesimally so.
It appears that the problem is in your imagination.

Mathematics and science are often not reducible to what we consider common sense which is based on our very limited sense of scale.

 

[sjastro]

As I said previously, there are no unbounded sets of real numbers. Real numbers are finite numbers. A set of real numbers is always a finite set.

The definition of real numbers excludes a finite set from being an infinite set.

The first bound is zero and the other bound is one. That is a bounded set of real numbers.

The infinite is described as unbounded.

OK since you believe the set of real numbers is a finite set write down and submit to us all the real numbers in the interval [0,1].
I suggest you get yourself a lot of coffee and sandwiches for this task while I will take the simple idea of counting the number of integers in the interval [0,1] which is 2.

 

[klutedavid]

OK since you believe the set of real numbers is a finite set write down and submit to us all the real numbers in the interval [0,1].
I suggest you get yourself a lot of coffee and sandwiches for this task while I will take the simple idea of counting the number of integers in the interval [0,1] which is 2.

Ok.

0.1
0.01
0.001 ... not infinite yet
0.0001
0.00001 ... still not infinite
0.000001
0.0000001 ... will the next one be an infinite iteration?
0.00000001
0.000000001 ...always a finite number it seems

How many iterations of finite numbers are required?

Obviously, a finite number is always followed by yet another finite number. Therefore, there cannot be a limitless number of iterations. The iterations are ultimately bounded by the definition of real numbers, the iterations must be finite iterations.

 

[klutedavid]

Yup
Nope
Agreed
Infinity is not a value number on the real number line since you have not reached it. Graphs as representations of mathematical equations often tend towards infinity.
Considered.
the first is considered to be closer to +infinity though only infinitesimally so.
It appears that the problem is in your imagination.

Mathematics and science are often not reducible to what we consider common sense which is based on our very limited sense of scale.

What does 'infinitesimally' mean?

How can infinity be a +infinity?

Your somehow defining infinity with a polarity.

 

[HARK!]

But surely if anything is possible then with an infinitely large universe, not only will it happen but it is actually happening now.

Yes if anything is possible; then so would be its' complete self destruction.

Not only would its' destruction come to be; but it would have already happened as soon as the universe came to be. Therefore the universe would have no longer existed; and it would have taken the here and now, with it, from the beginning.

~ The End ~

 

[Bradskii]

Yes if anything is possible; then so would be its' complete self destruction.

I'm not sure that's logically possible. But if it was, then wouldn't it's reappearance be equally probable?

 

[HARK!]

I'm not sure that's logically possible.

An infinitely large universe is logically impossible; as the Universe is expanding its' way to heat death.

But if it was, then wouldn't it's reappearance be equally probable?

On what logical principle can unrecoverable heat, reverse it's radiant expansion and form matter?

 

[Bradskii]

An infinitely large universe is logically impossible; as the Universe is expanding its' way to heat death.

I'd assume that as well. But it would be an assumption.

 

[sjastro]

Ok.

0.1
0.01
0.001 ... not infinite yet
0.0001
0.00001 ... still not infinite
0.000001
0.0000001 ... will the next one be an infinite iteration?
0.00000001
0.000000001 ...always a finite number it seems

How many iterations of finite numbers are required?

Obviously, a finite number is always followed by yet another finite number. Therefore, there cannot be a limitless number of iterations. The iterations are ultimately bounded by the definition of real numbers, the iterations must be finite iterations.

Apart from not answering my question it's painfully obvious you don't even understand what a finite set is.
A finite set is simply a set with a finite number of elements.
The elements don't even have to be numbers they can be objects such pelicans, apples or aardvarks.
In case of real numbers it doesn't matter that each number is finite, it's a case of counting each number in the set which is impossible given there are an infinite number of real numbers for any given interval or subset.

 

[HARK!]

I'd assume that as well. But it would be an assumption.

The expansion is observable and defined. It's radiant dissipation is measurable. Its' heat death is calculable.

Let's talk more about assumptions.

What best fits into the category of assumptions, empirical evidence, or imagination?

 

[Bradskii]

The expansion is observable and defined. It's radiant dissipation is measurable. Its' heat death is calculable.

What best fits into the category of assumptions, empirical evidence, or imagination?

'Today, the universe is 10 times warmer than it was 10 billion years ago.' Our feverish universe is getting hotter every day

And I'll take Imagination for $100.

 

[HARK!]

'Today, the universe is 10 times warmer than it was 10 billion years ago.' Our feverish universe is getting hotter every day

If this assessment is correct; it demonstrates that heat is being dissipated at a higher rate, than in times past. It would demonstrate that, at this point in time, the approach of heat death is accelerating; but whether or not it is accelerating or decelerating, will not change the inevitable outcome over infinite time.

 

[Bradskii]

If this assessment is correct; it demonstrates that heat is being dissipated at a higher rate, than in times past. It would demonstrate that, at this point in time, the approach of heat death is accelerating; but whether or not it is accelerating or decelerating, will not change the inevitable outcome over infinite time.

So heat death either way?

 

[HARK!]

So heat death either way?

There is only one way. The rate at which how much heat is being dissipated, at any given time, is variable.

Radiant energy propagates in all directions from it's origin. Heat moves from an area of greater concentration to an area of lesser concentration, until thermal equilibrium is reached. Thermal equilibrium will not be reached in infinite volume, with finite heat. When the source of the heat is exhausted, the temperature which is being radiated from the source will harmonically approach absolute zero. At absolute zero, atomic motion ceases.