Page 2 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

01 May 2014, 3:24 am

binaryodes wrote:
TallyMan wrote:
binaryodes wrote:
TallyMan wrote:
Why is "infinity" relevant to the universe's first cause?



If the universe is finite the argument is that something outside of time must have set a process in motion that brought it into existence. Even spontaneous generation still raises the question of what created the vacuum within which that occurred. The solution is to posit a mind outside of the system. This first cause has to be posited to avoid the inevitable infinite regress of causes for the universe. Its a paradox of sorts. A finite universe must have been brought into being by something which in turn... ad infinitum.


You have invented a concept of a "mind outside the system" from nowhere. What caused the mind and what caused the thing that caused the mind. Your argument is equally useless as the one it posits to dismiss.


The systemless mind seems to be a necessary postulation unless we wish to concede infinite causal regress. The very system of causality is a feature of the system we live within however. An intelligence outside that system would be exempt from its effect


Pure speculation/invention on your part.


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


binaryodes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2013
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 610
Location: England

01 May 2014, 6:15 am

Quote:
Pure speculation/invention on your part


its inductive yes perhaps I could just as easily suggest that an inanimate process outside the system launched the whole things. The nub of it is that a finite universe must have a cause which leads us back to infinite regress. A finite universe points towards infinity.


_________________
http://superstringbean.wordpress.com/ My Repository Of the Arcane the Esoteric and the Sublime
http://sybourgian.wordpress.com/ Neuroprotection, Neurogenesis Strategies for Long Term Cognitive Enhancement


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,566
Location: Queens, NYC

01 May 2014, 10:21 am

It is postulated that the universe is 13.8 Billion years old. I'm not so sure there's absolute proof. Then again, perhaps we don't really know, absolutely, what constitutes the universe.



Don_Pedro_Zamacona
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 78

01 May 2014, 11:26 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
- 'infinity' also comes up in mathematics will regards to integrating over physical space, however, there is no evidence that space can be infinite




NOT TRUE. You see, it has been assumed the Universe is finite but closes in on itself since there's not a shred of astronomical/astrophysical evidence for a boundary.


Quote:
- irrational numbers would seem to never end i.e., have an infinite number of repeating decimal numbers e.g., see my picture on left side of SQRT (2) is the finite space for the hypotenuse and never ends. However, math is made-up by humans.


Also not true. It describes reality so well that it effectively binds physical law.



binaryodes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2013
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 610
Location: England

01 May 2014, 11:43 am

Quote:
It describes reality so well that it effectively binds physical law.


The mathematical model describes the reality WE perceive. It does so remarkably well because deconstructing the univerfse produces numerical sequence at its core. Everything we are capable of perceiving can be delineated mathematically. That is everything can be represented or described mathematically. Mathematics doesnt decode the univerfse its a representational system. But im sure thats what you meant anyway. Im just expanding.


_________________
http://superstringbean.wordpress.com/ My Repository Of the Arcane the Esoteric and the Sublime
http://sybourgian.wordpress.com/ Neuroprotection, Neurogenesis Strategies for Long Term Cognitive Enhancement


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,331
Location: Aux Arcs

01 May 2014, 11:54 am

Autinger wrote:
Turtles all the way down.

[img][800:720]http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u660/2lucky4snuffy/05fb56ff791d39f941dfb35d0f3e0fc7_zpsa012dfc1.jpg[/img]


_________________
"Security is mostly a superstition.It does not exist in nature,nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure.Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing." Helen Keller


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

01 May 2014, 1:23 pm

Don_Pedro_Zamacona wrote:
NOT TRUE. You see, it has been assumed the Universe is finite but closes in on itself since there's not a shred of astronomical/astrophysical evidence for a boundary.


You link cites states ...

"We now know (as of 2013) that the universe is flat with only a 0.4% margin of error. This suggests that the Universe is infinite in extent".

"Suggests" does not appear to be much evidence.

The bible suggests GOD exists.

Don_Pedro_Zamacona wrote:
Also not true. It describes reality so well that it effectively binds physical law.


So do you think the infinite decimal expansion of irrational numbers transcends the human mind, and is evidence of "infinity" in the real world ?

The finite distance of the hypotenuse in my picture would appear to be definite, yet, somehow mathematics shows us that the distance is represented by the infinite ?


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,130
Location: Scandinavia

01 May 2014, 1:52 pm

An infinite universe is impossible, it would imply that the univserse has always existed, which is plain BS.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”


Last edited by Kurgan on 01 May 2014, 6:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,340
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

01 May 2014, 2:53 pm

Kurgan wrote:
An infinite universe is impossible; it would imply that the univserse has always existed, which is plain BS.

We might be running more into parlance trouble than anything when 'universe' is meant to imply everything in existence and our perceivable universe (as we've named it) may very well be an infinitesimally small point within an infinite set as such. In other words the Big Bang might only be relevant to us in our particular bubble.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

01 May 2014, 3:42 pm

I would point too ..

1. Euclid's theorem proves by contradiction in the proof that there is an infinite number of prime numbers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclid's_theorem

Wherein "infinite" means "a human can always come up with another prime number by counting higher". However, this "infinite" would still appear to be within human reasoning.

In the real world .. there are people paid to prove Euclid right ... :D

Bitcoins, Primecoins ... "cryptocurrency" are "mined" by computing for block strings of large prime numbers ...
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/a-week ... -algorithm

quoted: "Bitcoin Magazine pointed out that the Electronic Frontier Foundation "is offering $550,000 worth of prizes" to whichever groups are first to uncover a prime number more than 1 million, 10 million, 100 million, and 1 billion digits long. The first two—1 million and 10 million—have already been accounted for


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,130
Location: Scandinavia

01 May 2014, 6:49 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
An infinite universe is impossible; it would imply that the univserse has always existed, which is plain BS.

We might be running more into parlance trouble than anything when 'universe' is meant to imply everything in existence and our perceivable universe (as we've named it) may very well be an infinitesimally small point within an infinite set as such. In other words the Big Bang might only be relevant to us in our particular bubble.


How did the space, time, and physical laws these bubbles are in originate, then? The multiverse theory (or anything of resemblance) is used to fill in gaps that we have yet to solve. There's no proof or evidence to indicate that there are other universes or other sectors of the universe. Everything bound by physical laws originated at one point.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”


techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,340
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

01 May 2014, 9:24 pm

Kurgan wrote:
How did the space, time, and physical laws these bubbles are in originate, then? The multiverse theory (or anything of resemblance) is used to fill in gaps that we have yet to solve. There's no proof or evidence to indicate that there are other universes or other sectors of the universe. Everything bound by physical laws originated at one point.

Two possibilities work here - 1) eternal multiverse, 2) emanation of God, possibly both options for a virtual third option if one plays the game of considering the whole thing endless cups within cups where each cup has sentience.

If anyone would be bold enough to say that that they're both a strong atheist (full reductive materialist) and also cleaves to the notion that this is probably the only universe that has existed but that nothing - not even quantum static - was there to generate it, they're talking crazy. To even have quantum static is to have something which means there was a before to generate the effect, even if such a timeline existed purely tangential to our own - it's an exterior and that's precisely the point.



Don_Pedro_Zamacona
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 78

02 May 2014, 1:00 am

Kurgan wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
An infinite universe is impossible; it would imply that the univserse has always existed, which is plain BS.

We might be running more into parlance trouble than anything when 'universe' is meant to imply everything in existence and our perceivable universe (as we've named it) may very well be an infinitesimally small point within an infinite set as such. In other words the Big Bang might only be relevant to us in our particular bubble.


How did the space, time, and physical laws these bubbles are in originate, then? The multiverse theory (or anything of resemblance) is used to fill in gaps that we have yet to solve. There's no proof or evidence to indicate that there are other universes or other sectors of the universe. Everything bound by physical laws originated at one point.



And how did that one point come into being? And moreover, what is the causal agent of the expansion of that singularity into the Universe as it exists now?
Assuming that the Universe is finite in size and history and that Causality holds over everything that exists(within and beyond the Cosmos), then the infinite causal chain cannot be avoided. Tallyman makes the presumption that whatever created the Universe is exempt from causality, which is dubious at best.

FTR, it is impossible to confirm or deny what lies beyond the Universe(or at least the observable Universe) which makes the existence of the Multiverse(or Omniverse as I like to call it) non-falsifiable by current science. But there isn't enough evidence to conclude that the Universe actually is finite in the first place! No Cosmic boundaries have ever been observed nor has it been determined through observations that the global geometry of the Universe is a boundryless compact manifold.



01001011
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 991

02 May 2014, 1:08 am

That 'how the universe come into being' had been done to death. Our idea of time just fails some 13.8 billion years ago.



Don_Pedro_Zamacona
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 78

02 May 2014, 1:17 am

01001011 wrote:
That 'how the universe come into being' had been done to death. Our idea of time just fails some 13.8 billion years ago.



Then what is the origin of the singularity that the Universe came from?



01001011
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 991

02 May 2014, 1:25 am

Time is part of the universe. The universe exists all time, even though the past can be finite. 'Before the existence of the universe' is just meaningless/contradictory.