Quote:
Quote by: Nathan Struth  THe universe can't be infinite, nor can time... Here's why it 's a very simple proof.
Definition:1. Time is used to represent change.
2. Infinity divided by anything = infinity.
Axioms:1. Infinity cannot be divided by infinity in this scenario.
If the universe is infinite, then you cannot divide it! Or else by def. 2 you would get an infinite quoetient. But don't try to say infinity / infinity because of Axiom 1.
Try to refute this proof I made it myself. I got help from Spinozas Ethics pt. 1 and 2. |
This is appalling. Seriously. If you produced this for me in philosophy class, I would give you an F. If your proof had been done correctly, all you would have proven is that infinity divided by a finite number is still infinity. The big question I have for you is: SO? How does this demonstrate that the universe cannot be infinite? That's besides the point, though; It's all so horribly wrong, I don't even know where to begin. I guess I'll just go in order of your claims.
The first big mistake is your definition of time, which is totally and completely inaccurate. Time is not directly related to change, and is definitely not representative or indicative of such. We have quantitative measurements for that (eg, the kilogram or the pound). Time might be the axis on which change occurs, but time does not mean it represents change directly, or really, at all. Furthermore, you have no way of knowing that time is constant, or even continuous; all you know is that your perception is continuous, and even
that isn't constant. Your conceptualization of change being represented isn't even reliable, because everything could be constantly slowing down or speeding up in different places. Time only works as an axis of comparison between changes when the scale of comparison is balanced enough for time to be reliable (assuming, of course, there are no major effects by other things happening around the comparison). On the level of a galactic masses and infinite distances, time behaves a little differently from the microscopic world you inhabit.
Your second definition is also wrong. I don't know where you took math, but infinity divided by anything does not equal infinity. What about 0? What about infinity? I don't have to explain this more... on the merits of those two instances alone, it's obvious that you are wrong.
I have no reason to accept your arbitrary axiom, since you don't explain why it is instituted. I can't divide by infinity? Oh yeah? Why not? I can do whatever I want; you're not the boss of me. I see no logical contradiction in dividing by infinity.
You then go on to mention that you can't divide an infinite universe without getting an infinite quotient. (That's wrong, but let's just assume that you meant "finite nonzero number" instead of "any number that's not infinity.") And? What's your point? What does this have to do with "proving" that the universe is not infinite?
Now that I've successfully destroyed every point you've made, I'd just like to take the time to mention that anything based in Spinoza is highly questionable. Now that I've said that, I challenge you, Nathan, to refute the Singular Argument. How can any relationship exist without constituting the existence of everything that relationship implies? (See above.) For example, how can 1 and 2 exist without 3 also existing?
Quote:
Quote by: shunyadragon The present mathimatics and cosmology of the nature of existence recognizes actual infinites which work well in the present models for the nature of our universe and the non-universe that surrounds it. Yes, infinity cannot be divided, but in the present models for cosmologies of existence they are not trying to divide actual infinities in time and space. There are basically variations of two models cosmologists use for our universe. The first is that the universe is finite in both time and space and began in a singularity that expanded to our present state and will end either by contraction to another singularity or it will disapate into a th non-universe I will call th Infinite Matrix (IM). The second model invlves a cyclic universe that expands and contracts in a cyclic manner and is infinite in time, yes, present mathmatics and cosmology allows for infinite time. Both of these models fit within various multiverse models that in turn exist within the IM. The IM is basically an infinite matrix in time and space with infinite matter and energy. Universe from exist and end within this IM according to the laws of the IM. |
I regret to say that you are wrong, but unfortunately, you'll have to wait two weeks for an explanation. Sorry, bud.