Question regarding logical conclusions regarding infinity-relationships.
Posted on: April 17, 2007 - 2:27am
Offline
Question regarding logical conclusions regarding infinity-relationships.
Hope you can help. Tell me what you think-- if the question isn't clear, I can attempt to clear it up.. but, I really appreciate a set of objective eyes on the question.
"Does infinite time coupled with infinite possible actions allow specific actions not to occur at any given time? necessitate infinite repetition of action over infinite time? necessitate every possible action will be done at least once over infinite time? Or, none of the above?"
- Login to post comments
Yep. If just one of these actions was being repeated over and over then the rest wouldn't occur.
Well, if you have a finite amount of actions running over an infinite amount of time then sooner or later there's going to be a repetition.
If there's an infinite amount of actions then no repetition is necessary.
Isn't this question the negation of the first question?
I believe the difference is that the first question specifies that at "any give time"-- while the last question uses the conceptual time of "infinite time". Well.. since "infinite time" will never will be reached.. I don't think it is particularly significant in anyway.
I sort of realized this distinction after I wrote out the question.. but I wasn't sure if anyone else would notice it.
Can you see it now? Or am I just seeing some disctinction that isn't there?
Can you elaborate what you mean by 'any given time'?
Do you mean that "Pick a time - is it possible that an action won't be done here?" or do you mean "Pick an action - is it possible that this action won't be done at any time at all?"?
In order for the phrase 'any given time' to mean anything, everyone involve with 'any given time' will need to syncronize their time measuring/tracking references - like watches and calenders.
Without a reference its meaningless
People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
The first.
The latter would be the equivalent of saying "over infinite time" is it possible that any action won't be done.
Since "infinite time" will never be reached.. it doesn't really seem that important with regards to this theme.
Now.. if we were talking mathematically.. perhaps there would be some usefulness.. but here, I don't believe so. Perhaps I'm wrong.
But yes.. in clarification. When I stated "any given time" I meant "any particular point in time".
So yes, as you stated, "pick a time (any particular point in time)-- is it possible that an action won't be done here?"
Why's that?
5 minutes ago.
Now.
A million years from now.
These are particular points in time.. I do not believe they would be considered meaningless just because another person might consider "5minutes and 46 seconds" or "7 minutes" to be what I considered "5minutes" suggests that it has no significance.
Infinity is a nonsense concept. It defines itself out of existence. Better shelve it along with other figments of the fevered imagination like squared circles.
Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown
shhhh. Don't tell matheticians that. They're really lost in the lie.
Heh.. indeed. Mathematics seems to have found some use for it..
But yah.. in reality.. I would probably agree.. anything "infinite" is only "infinite" in the sense that it is perceived that way. Which is why I might contend any sort of argument which would seek to apply "infinity" to reality as a "matter of fact" issue.
Unless every possible action was being done simultaneously at every second... yes. Seems like an odd question!
Incidently, as a semi-mathematician, infinite makes perfect sense to me. All the paradoxes I've seen so far seem to merely misuse the concept in some way or another. I'm not 100% sure where the controversy lies. To say that the universe is infinite, all that says is that whatever you find out about the universe there will always be something more. To say that there's an infinite amount of numbers is to say that whatever number you count to there will always be another one higher. To say that there's an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1 is to point out that whatever number A you find between 0 and 1, there will be another number B that lies between A and 1. Where's the controversy?
This reminds me of the Schrodiener's cat thought experiment >_>
I meant in regards to infinity.
People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
Heh. Sorry.. with regards to my statement I will clarify again.
"Pick a time (any time)-- is it possible that at this time a particular action could not have been done EVER in the entire span of time that predated it (if there is an infinite amount of possible actions to do)."
I would agree with you with regards to infinite and mathematics and even the universe. Yet, while the relationship between infinite and other numbers is axiomatic (in mathematics I believe), in reality the word "infinity" is nothing more then perception.
The universe is "infinite".. does that mean that it IS infinite? Or merely that I have not perceived an end?
So.. when someone says.. "Over infinite time every action will be repeated infinitely EVEN IF there are infinite possible actions to do" may be true mathematically.. yet, is this to say that the concept means anything when applied to reality? Because.. within the concept of "infinite time".. we will never reach "infinite time".. only "particular time within infinite time".
Beh.. wordy.
Anyways.. please continue. You're definitely helping in my understanding. 
Incidently, as a semi-mathematician, infinite makes perfect sense to me. All the paradoxes I've seen so far seem to merely misuse the concept in some way or another. I'm not 100% sure where the controversy lies. To say that the universe is infinite, all that says is that whatever you find out about the universe there will always be something more. To say that there's an infinite amount of numbers is to say that whatever number you count to there will always be another one higher. To say that there's an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1 is to point out that whatever number A you find between 0 and 1, there will be another number B that lies between A and 1. Where's the controversy?
Infinity is a concept as God is a concept. You accept infinity as a concept and realise you will never reach inifinity. Same with God.
Isn't the infinity arguement just as valid as the God arguement?
Just food for thought.
god is nothing
People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
Who said anything about time? I'm talking about the concept of infinity.
If one action was repeated over and over for the infinite history then the rest would never have been done.
Um... I wouldn't refer to infinite as a number and I'm not sure of any axioms that refer to infinite. As far as I'm aware, it's just a way of saying 'no end'.
It means that there's no end to perceive.
I don't think that it is. If there are an infinite amount of actions then repetition should never be necessary. Why? 'Infinite amount' means there is no 'last' action. Which action you have just performed there will be another one that you haven't done yet. Otherwise there isn't an infinite amount.
I think that this misused the word infinite.
It treated it like a number you can 'reach'.
Infinite isn't a number. It's more of a way of saying 'no last number'.
To say 'once infinite has passed' is an internal contradiction.
To say 'this will finish in an infinite amount of time' is to say that it cannot finish.
I'm not so sure about God...
Finite is 'to have an end' and infinite simply negates finite.
So infinite has a negative definition.
If I say the yellow brick road is infinite then I say that it goes on forever and that there is no end to reach.
I'm not sure which God concept you are talking of but you might be thinking of the negative theologians who declared that we cannot know what God is, only define what God is not. However, this negation wasn't just of one attribute - 'to have an end' - it was of all comprehensible attributes... so we end up with a statement more or less saying 'God isn't anything'...
Ofcourse, that probably isn't what you meant by God at all!
What's your concept of God and how does it relate to infinite?
Thanks Strafios. You have greatly expanded (and corrected) my understanding of the concept of infinite.. as well as the implications within its use.
I think I can actually part this thread in peace now.. heh.
You're welcome. Flattery always makes my day!
btw, next time you thank me could you bear in mind that there's only one of me here? Ta!
I have double vision.. which, as part of its symptoms, adds "s"s to the end personal nouns.
"the horror, the horror." --Brando
People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
Let me put it this way: Is the universe 'infinite'? You are bounding infinity to size. i.e if I fly to any point in the universe you can fly any given distance ahead of me proving that I did not reach the 'end' of the universe.
Compare the concept of God with the concept of the universe being infinite.
BTW, god is beyond the universe, remember? Beyond time.
People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
Yes the universe exists. Now prove that it's infinite.
Noone has said that the universe is infinate. Proving it is infinate is neither necessary nor possible at this time.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
illogical comparison
People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
All anyone truly can say with regard to actual or potential real infinites is that we don't know if there are any or not.
There are good arguments on both sides. I tend towards the side that thinks reality is infinitley grainy, analog. Though I've met many who think reality is quantized no matter what aspect is being considered.