Wasting time with philosophical subjects

[Jdvn1]

Really?
So there will be no new ideas ever again?
Just curious, when was the last idea thought?
I was hoping I could still find some new ones!

Aaron

Remember the original assumption -- IF the universe is infinite. Which, as far as we can tell with modern science, it isn't.

 

[Abstraction]

Philosophy. Meh. My look on it is that, though no matter if the universe is A) infinite and unbounded, B) infinite and bounded or C) finite, in every part of the universe everything is composed of the same basic units which behave in the same way everywhere*. If we had the capability to travel the entire universe, we would see oddities but nothing particularly special or unique. Kinda how you feel when you take a traveling vacation in the US.

So, while philosophy is fun, nowhere in the universe will you find atoms where the protons orbit and the electron sits in the nucleus. Simply can't happen.

*Note that particles did not always behave the same. When the universe was very, very young and very, very hot the different forces were united and behaved differently. Also note that while we do not have a great grasp on dark matter or dark energy, we do know that it acts in the universe in a very homogeneous fashion.

 

[Umbran]

The laws of physics, as we know them, are not really inconsistent with a universe of infinite physical size and of eternal duration. That does not, however, mean that all things that can be imagined will exist within it. Physical laws can still hold in such a universe, and thus preclude some things from happening.

The bit about infinite space and stars was conjectured before the nature of light was fully understood. Given that light has finite speed, the conjecture is incorrect - The universe may be infinite, but we can only see a finite-sized chunk of it, due to the finite speed of light. So, we are not looking out at an infinite number of stars.

And, btw, we cannot ever truly solve all mysteries (or really any mysteries) if all theories are unprovable.

 

[Abstraction]

The other thing about the night sky glowing bright with infinite stars...Even in a less than infinite universe, astrophysicists had been wondering for some time why the night sky isn't brighter. The current, most-accepted theory is the inflationary model where the very early universe expanded in size (and consequently flung everything apart from each other) at many times greater than the speed of light. This, of course, naturally led to its rapid cooling.

 

[Psion]

That's an interesting concept, but I have a hard time thinking about it.

For one thing, infinite number of stars is obviously in an infinite space. Now, stars are of finite size/duration/etc., so the finite amount of light they produce cannot fill an infinite space.

Wrong.

The answer is unknowable without more information. The amount of light would be a product of the ratio of the amount of stars divided by the amount of space. Dividing infinity by infinity is undefined.

 

[Jdvn1]

The laws of physics, as we know them, are not really inconsistent with a universe of infinite physical size and of eternal duration. That does not, however, mean that all things that can be imagined will exist within it. Physical laws can still hold in such a universe, and thus preclude some things from happening.

I think you're missing the point of the original quote. Smith is assuming the universe is infinite. That's not under contention. The issue is whether or not the conclusion is true, based on the assumption.

 

[Umbran]

I think you're missing the point of the original quote. Smith is assuming the universe is infinite. That's not under contention. The issue is whether or not the conclusion is true, based on the assumption.

I'm not missing anything. I'm not disputing the assumption in the least, I am addressing the conclusion.

The size - physically or temporally - is required for the conclusion, but it is not sufficient. If there is a single set of rules governing that infinite space, then things in conflict with those rules will be imaginable, but not realizable within the space.

You need an infinte space, and a set of physical laws that infinitely varies throughout the space. And even then, you can't quite do it, because you can always imagine something that is in conflict with the local laws, "Yes, I know pigs can fly at Alpha Centauri, but I want a pig to fly here."

 

[Torm]

To which I answer: "As such, even a creature that may imagine what absolutely cannot exist, could happen in such an universe".

Opinions?

It seems to me that this goes hand in hand with the old question "Can G-d make a rock even He couldn't lift?"

I think that the answer to your question lies in the subjective nature of reality, but all of the examples I can think of lead me too deeply into either religion, QM, or BS for me to want to follow right now.

 

[Turanil]

"Can G-d make a rock even He couldn't lift?"

I am wondering if I replace the "-" of this G-d by a "o", if you will feel compelled to save the post on a hard drive and take care to never delete it... (no offense intended ).

Anyway, today in this infinite universe of endless possibilities, life again conspired to aggravate my misery. Now, as I don't have a penny in my pocket, and relies on my girlfriend's generosity to feed me, the thing that heat water in the appartment finally died, and replacing it is 1000 $. This has nothing to do with the thread, but man, I am so tired...

 

[Abstraction]

...the thing that heat water in the appartment...

That's called a "water heater"