Page 4 of 4 [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

dddhgg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,108
Location: The broom closet on the 13th floor

31 Dec 2009, 1:11 pm

Orwell wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
I am a mathematician and I deal with infinities every working day. It is no big deal. I, with my finite brain capacity, can range the length and breadth of the infinite.

Only with cognitive tricks, of the same sort I use to play with infinity and visualize objects in four and five spatial dimensions. When you try to approach infinity honestly, laying your tricks, heuristics, and intuitions behind, you will quickly realize your limitations. The human mind is incapable of truly comprehending infinity. Indeed, there are a number of deeply counterintuitive results that crop up when you use infinities rigorously. Surely you are familiar with Abel and Cesaro summability, which lead you to truly bizarre results. And I'm certain you also know that the set of rationals and the set of integers have the same cardinality, despite the fact that the integers are a proper subset of the rationals. How does that make any sense? It appears to violate trichotomy.

Unless our axiom set is inconsistent, the only answer here is that we don't really understand infinity.


What is your point here? That the mathematical concept of "infinity", which to my mind is relatively well understood, does not correspond to some other, philosophically more "correct" concept of infinity? That we can come up with all those nice counterintuitive results, about Cesaro summability, cardinalities of infinite sets, etc., implies, to my mind at least, just the opposite of what you posit, viz., I think that we have really gained a much more profound understanding of infinity, both in the "actual" and the "potential" sense, than our forefathers had in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Also, what do you mean with your remark about trichotomy? The axiom of trichotomy only applies to real numbers, not infinite quantities so I don't see its relevance here.

Lastly, that the cardinality of a proper subset of a set can equal that of the set itself is perfectly sensible. The concept of cardinality is often described as being a measure of how "infinite" a set is, but this is only a (bad) metaphor extrapolated from the finite case. In the finite case the cardinality indeed counts the number of elements in a set, but in the infinite case it simply doesn't do that anymore, because the operation of counting is meaningless for infinities. That two sets have equal cardinalities merely means that a bijection exists between the two.


_________________
Dabey müssen wir nichts seyn, sondern alles werden wollen, und besonders nicht öffter stille stehen und ruhen, als die Nothdurfft eines müden Geistes und Körpers erfordert. - Goethe


wesmontfan
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 144
Location: Near Washington DC

02 Jan 2010, 2:24 pm

Descartes wrote:
SporadSpontan wrote:
Hi Descartes, if there is such a law as 'matter cannot be either created or destroyed' then you've just contradicted yourself by saying that forests can be burnt down (ie destroyed) and then they repair themselves. A seed must be created from something (ie another tree) and the continuous cycle continues onto the seedling being created from the seed and on it goes.

There's no intelligence. It's a basic law of cause and effect.


I didn't think of that. But what I think the law of "matter cannot be created nor destroyed" implies is that if something is destroyed, then it will ultimately be replaced.

There is NO contradiction between saying "matter cant be destroyed" and saying that "forests can burn down".

Burning a forest does not cause any matter to be destroyed.

what it causes is matter to transform into other forms of matter(violent as it might be). Carbon in the wood combines with oxegen in the air to become smoke and ash causing the trees to stop being trees and become fly ash and cinders, But the tonnage of matter remains the same- no atom of matter ceases to exist.
Some of the ash becomes mulch on the ground that nourishes tree seedlings- and the matter gets recylced back into trees again years later.

Einstein said matter can be converted into energy, and vice versa( e=mc2) causing even more violence than a forest fire. Thats another topic.
But even then matter is converted to something( ie energy) it doesnt just cease to exist.



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

02 Jan 2010, 9:41 pm

Yeah, sorry - I was using the term 'matter' very loosely and incorrectly. But anyhow I didn't actually want to argue that point. Because I agree that there is a continual cycling of 'matter'. I just wanted to debate about the intelligence of nature. And anyhow, now that I think more about it, I'm starting to lean more to the side that there IS some sort of intelligence in the way of a consciousness that encompasses all existence. That consciousness would be our own consciousness which at the moment is very limited in its ability to know its full potential. But that's what I think - that it's actually our mind that creates everything we experience. So therefore - an intelligence. But that's not to say that I think plants and rocks are sentient beings. That's an entirely different thing altogether and I won't agree with that.


_________________
happily reclusive


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

02 Jan 2010, 10:13 pm

SporadSpontan wrote:
Yeah, sorry - I was using the term 'matter' very loosely and incorrectly. But anyhow I didn't actually want to argue that point. Because I agree that there is a continual cycling of 'matter'. I just wanted to debate about the intelligence of nature. And anyhow, now that I think more about it, I'm starting to lean more to the side that there IS some sort of intelligence in the way of a consciousness that encompasses all existence. That consciousness would be our own consciousness which at the moment is very limited in its ability to know its full potential. But that's what I think - that it's actually our mind that creates everything we experience. So therefore - an intelligence. But that's not to say that I think plants and rocks are sentient beings. That's an entirely different thing altogether and I won't agree with that.


Human consciousness exists only on Earth which is a totally negligible part of the universe.Humans are insignificant except as in our extremely local area, both timewise and spacewise.



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

02 Jan 2010, 10:44 pm

And yet - it is not known for sure. So we can't be saying this with so much certainty. If the questions are not asked, the answers will not be found.

Perhaps it freaks you out - the idea that there is an all-encompassing consciousness that we are a long way from realising?


_________________
happily reclusive


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

02 Jan 2010, 10:47 pm

SporadSpontan wrote:
And yet - it is not known for sure. So we can't be saying this with so much certainty. If the questions are not asked, the answers will not be found.

Perhaps it freaks you out - the idea that there is an all-encompassing consciousness that we are a long way from realising?


No it doesn't freak me out, it strikes me as indulging in ridiculous fantasy with no basis in evidence.



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

02 Jan 2010, 10:57 pm

Oh yeah, I forgot! lol


_________________
happily reclusive


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

02 Jan 2010, 11:02 pm

SporadSpontan wrote:
Oh yeah, I forgot! lol


Good thing I'm around to jog your memory.



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

02 Jan 2010, 11:13 pm

Well yeah - there's a few other things I've forgotten as well. If I could remember what they were I'd ask you to remind me of them.


_________________
happily reclusive


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

02 Jan 2010, 11:53 pm

SporadSpontan wrote:
Well yeah - there's a few other things I've forgotten as well. If I could remember what they were I'd ask you to remind me of them.


Happy to be of service.



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

03 Jan 2010, 2:16 am

Sand wrote:
SporadSpontan wrote:
Well yeah - there's a few other things I've forgotten as well. If I could remember what they were I'd ask you to remind me of them.


Happy to be of service.


haha! I'm just happy to see the word 'happy' because it's my favourite word! lol Could have just made up for the things I've forgotten!!


_________________
happily reclusive