• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Is there an infinity?

infinity forever

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 26 December 2016 - 01:43 PM


If we want to be immortal, we need to grant ourselves a way to live forever. For that we need an infinity.

 

Some people claim, that infinity (as general concept) is impossible, and therefore there is no forever. Since there is no forever, we can't be alive forever. E.g. some sort of a rule of the universe disabeling the possibility of immortality.

 

They base their views against the infinity on the paradoxes and the impossibility of existence of the such called Gilbert's Hotel

 

https://youtu.be/j_q802eboxA

 

I found a vide, that claims, that in the case of even numbers, the Gilbert's Hotel is still possible.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=Uj3_KqkI9Zo

 

 

I wonder what do you think about the existence of infinite.



#2 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 26 December 2016 - 04:03 PM

One way to look at this paradox, is that...  as there was a "big bang", or beginning of the universe, at a certain specific point in the past, there is no 'infinite' past, ergo, there can be no such concept as infinity....that is, unless someone can come up with what was (if there was anything) before the big bang and of course no one can  :wacko:


  • Agree x 1

#3 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 27 December 2016 - 09:39 AM

Of course, as a concept, the infinity is clearly possible. Mathematicians like Hilbert (not Gilbert ;) ) use it all the time. As for whether the Universe will have an end in time, current consensus is that the Universe is flat and will continue to expand forever. But hey, we haven't the slightest idea about what the 95% of the Universe is made of, so I wouldn't bet a penny on that consensus.


Edited by Antonio2014, 27 December 2016 - 10:04 AM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 27 December 2016 - 10:53 AM

About the first video, I'm not convinced of its main claims. He says that there can't be an infinite number of things in the Universe, and to support this, he explains some counterintuitive facts about The Hotel of the Infinity. But, to my view, they are only counterintuitive, he hasn't proven they are physically impossible. There are lots of counterintuitive facts in physics. To prove that the hotel is impossible, he must go much further into physical details. His second main claim is that, since there can't be an infinite number of things (i.e., physical objects, like rooms), there can't be an infinite past history. He gives no explanation of why the former implies the latter. For example, he could have tried to build the time version of the spatial hotel, were seconds take the place of rooms, but he didn't.

 

 

Another version of the example in the second video:

 

 

This video is also interesting:

 


Edited by Antonio2014, 27 December 2016 - 11:26 AM.


#5 Danail Bulgaria

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 27 December 2016 - 01:59 PM

Interesting videos.

Why is it necessay the Universe to be flat?

Why not we suppose, that the Universe is infinite in the 3 demensions? Something like an infinitely large sphere :unsure:



#6 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 28 December 2016 - 10:48 AM

The definition of "flat" is not what you are thinking of. It's flat in 3 dimensions (well, actually in 4 dimensions if we consider time). Did you hear that gravity bends space? So, in the vicinity of a massive object, the space is curved (space-time indeed). What happens to he Universe as a whole? What is the mean curvature of the Universe? It seems that it's flat, i.e., not curved. This global curvature determines its final destiny:

 

- If it's positively curved, it means there is much mass in it, so that much gravity will make the Universe finally contract itself and finish in the opposite of the Big Bang, a Big Crunch.

 

- If it's negatively curved, it means there is something like negative gravity (created by dark energy) that opposes positive gravity (created by usual matter and energy, and dark matter) and is bigger than it. The Universe will expand forever at an exponentially increasing rate.

 

- If it's flat, we are in a limiting case between the two above, and it will expand forever but not so fast as in the second case. This seems to be the case in the real world, but measure errors can easily change that to any of the two other scenarios.

 

Of course, the above explanation is an oversimplification of the real explanation, but it shows the point.


Edited by Antonio2014, 28 December 2016 - 10:57 AM.


#7 EverlastingLife

  • Guest
  • 20 posts
  • 0
  • Location:United States

Posted 05 February 2017 - 03:27 AM

Infinity is actually the truth and is what exists in reality.

What is missing in argument is four-fold:

1. Not realizing there are different sizes of infinities.
2. Not realizing two infinities of equal size can cancel out each other.
3. Not realizing it's possible to go past an infinity.
4. Changing definitions.

In the hotel experiment, if there are an infinite number of rooms and all rooms are filled with an infinite number of people, then with that definition, all rooms are canceled out.

This is because:

infinity - infinity = zero (assuming they are equal)
Infinity Hotels - Infinity People = Zero Rooms Left

However, if it were:

Infinity Hotels - Finite People = Infinity Rooms Left

Thus, right from the start, if all the rooms were filled, you cannot (by definition) add another person. This was the mistake, and doesn't discount there is an infinity - it's just matched with another, equal infinity canceling them all out.

However, once you define you are ABLE to add another person, you are redefining the infinity to be infinity + 1, but that "+1" is outside the original infinity (hotels) and incorporates a much larger one.

Yes, there are infinity hotels but it's match with an equally number of infinite people, this makes there (logically) to not have any rooms left.

To say "All" and then, "No, not 'all'" is the mistake and it just changes in definition. But the original argument assumes there cannot be infinities of greater or equal magnitude, but there can.

You can see my video here on how we can define infinities, which also relates to the subject. In it the cells can represent hotels and the people numbers:

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=oiCS9VnmPvw

#8 A941

  • Guest
  • 1,027 posts
  • 51
  • Location:Austria

Posted 23 July 2017 - 01:10 AM

I wonder if we can say that there is something that has existed since forever. I mean is such a concept thinkable?

Yes we can imagine that something starting from point A can go on forever, allthough we can not prove it.

But how do you imagine something that allready has existed forever until a point A in time?

 



#9 Danail Bulgaria

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 25 July 2017 - 07:49 AM

The rules of mathematics? They seem to be existent forever. They have no beginning and no end. They simply exist. When you add an apple to another apple there always will be two apples. Never 3 and never 1.



#10 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 25 July 2017 - 01:14 PM

The rules of mathematics? They seem to be existent forever. They have no beginning and no end. They simply exist. When you add an apple to another apple there always will be two apples. Never 3 and never 1.

 

That may be somewhat true is 'our' universe, but in other universes, who's to say?

 

Even here, if you take '1' photon,  shoot it at a half silvered mirror, somehow the photon can be seen shooting out in two directions, being half reflected one way and another. So '1' = '2' even here in this case. 

Alternatively, shoot '1' photon at a single slit in a barrier, and somehow light is seen in several places on the other side, aka, in a wave diffraction pattern. Still, we only shot '1' single photon. So, '1' = (n) in this case?

 

How can this be?  Well, because things are not what they may seem, even in this universe.



#11 Danail Bulgaria

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 26 July 2017 - 06:16 AM

These are things, that the science wil explain in the future. And when ot does, it will be see, that the rules of the mathematics will not be broken. The photon somehow takes energy from the surrounding environment and generates a second photon without violating the mathemathical rules. Otherwise perprtummobile will be possible. 1 qant of energy = 2 qoants of energie = perpetummobile.



#12 Danail Bulgaria

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 26 July 2017 - 08:12 AM

lol.

 

The hals silvered mirrors don't generate new photones nor violate the mathemathical rules. They simply reflect only the half of the photones and let the other half pass.

 

http://science.howst...question421.htm



#13 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 26 July 2017 - 01:41 PM

lol.

 

The hals silvered mirrors don't generate new photones nor violate the mathemathical rules. They simply reflect only the half of the photones and let the other half pass.

 

http://science.howst...question421.htm

 

lol is right.  We all know how half silvered mirrors work. That has nothing to do with this single photon issue. Of course, Quantum Physics has everything to do with it, as in how the photon can choose whether it is a single particle or a wave depending on what is required of it.

 

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/grangier.pdf

 

Wave-particle duality for a single photon : A one-photon state of the light is prepared and sent towards a beamsplitter. In the left part of the figure, the single photon exhibits a particle-like behaviour : it is detected by either one of the detectors, but there is never a “double click”. One would conclude classically that the photon “chooses its way” on the beamsplitter. In the right part of the figure, the output beams are recombined to form a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. For a single-photon input, the photon output channel can now be controlled by moving any of the two mirrors (double arrows on the figure) : for instance, one can adjust the mirror’s position so that the photon always goes to the upper channel (with probability one). This is the single-photon equivalent of having a totally destructive interference in the lower channel (“real” fringes can also be reconstructed by sending many individual photons, for various mirrors positions). Classically, one would conclude that each photon has to go through both ways like a wave, but this conclusion is contradictory with the previous one. Only the quantum theory of light is able to give a consistent description of both experiments.

 

http://www.sciencema...es-even-weirder

 

A single dollop of light, or photon, must be described by a flowing quantum wave that gives the probability of finding it at any particular place and time. At the same time, the photon acts a bit like an indivisible bullet: When observed with a particle detector, it produces a distinct signal, like a pebble pinging off a car door. And things get weirder. The quantum wave can split in two and recombine, like ripples flowing around a stump in a pond, to create striking "interference" effects that determine which way the recombined wave flows. On the other hand, it's simply impossible to split a photon at a fork in the road. If there is no way to eventually put the pieces back together, the photon acts like a particle and goes one way or the other.



#14 Danail Bulgaria

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 26 July 2017 - 06:36 PM

These are things, that the curent science can't explain fully. Some day the science will understand it better, and it will be seen, that whatever is happening with the photon and its dual nature - wave and particle, it will not violate the laws of calculating.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: infinity, forever

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users