Universe can't be infinite.

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

seeds
Posts: 2135
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by seeds »

surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:04 am [......]
surreptitious57, before I address the substance of your reply, I am having trouble understanding how you can quote me (presumably using the site’s quote system) and suddenly all of my carefully placed commas, periods, dashes, apostrophes, arrows, and even some of my words, are missing.

What’s up with that?

I don’t mean to be anal-retentive about this :D, but if you are going to “quote” us, then could you please make sure that the quote appears in precisely the form it was written.

Thanks
_______
seeds
Posts: 2135
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by seeds »

seeds wrote: Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:11 pm I hope everyone will forgive me for constantly using the same visualization tools, but imagine the large bracket depicted below...

Past <---------[

...as representing the inception point of the universe, and that each of the tiny dashes represent one billion years of time prior to that inception point.

Now as a matter of speculative logic, at no point would we ever encounter a wall that would prevent us from extending the billion-year dashes infinitely into the past.

Likewise, the same would also apply if the bracket below represented the thermodynamic ending of the universe...

]---------> Future

...for at no point would we ever encounter a time-halting wall.

In which case, the most logical way of viewing the situation - (at least from a purely materialistic perspective) - is that the universe is simply a momentary “blip” that arose within the eternal stream of time...

ETERNITY<----[universe]---->ETERNITY

...and in no way should be perceived as the moment when time “began,” as is suggested in your response.

The truth of the matter is that the universe is, in essence, a “machine-like” phenomenon whose “cogs and gears” can move no faster than the speed of light.

It is a machine that appears to have commandeered time itself and has caused all those who are caught-up within its inner-workings to be subject to the machine’s highly specific cadence.
surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:04 am Separating the Universe from Eternity is problematic because if the definition of Universe is ALL THERE IS then logically that would include everything outside of the Universe. So Eternity is therefore part of the Universe. And it has to be eternal because absolute nothing can only
exist infinitesimally before it is violated by quantum fluctuations
First of all, you seem to be confusing the word “eternity” (which is a reference to time) with that of the word “infinity” (which is a reference to distance).

And secondly, the idea of “absolute nothingness” vividly implies that there literally cannot exist a context in which “quantum fluctuations” could take place. And if you argue against that, then you simply do not understand what the term absolute nothingness” actually means.

Furthermore, in tandem with the above, you also don’t seem to understand what the word “universe” means in modern-day scientific parlance, for in the context of “multiverse” theories, there could exist an infinity of other (sovereign and independent) universes.

So the word “universe” does not necessarily mean “ALL THERE IS” (especially if you factor-in the possibility of transcendent realms of existence).

And lastly, (and regardless of whether it is true or not), I am using the Big Bang theory as the basis of my assertions.

And according to the Big Bang theory, the universe allegedly (and literally) began 13.8 billion years ago as something that was perhaps as small as the tiny dot situated between these two brackets – [.] - (or even smaller).

Therefore, the entire phenomenon that we call a “universe”...

(i.e., all of reality as we understand reality to be)

...was once contained within a closed and “bounded” area that was literally no larger than that dot.

Now setting aside the mystery of where the “dot” came from...

(which, clearly, is what science does)

...not only does it represent the universe in terms of its finite size when compared to the infinite nothingness that is constantly “giving-way” to its expansion, but it also is a figurative representation of the amount of time that the universe has existed relative to eternity.

In which case, by reason of the fact that we can picture the universe as once being the size of this closed and bounded dot [.], combined with the fact that we can also view it (the universe) as simply being an expanded (yet still bounded) version of that dot in the form of this...

Image

...makes it extremely easy to separate the universe from both eternity and infinity.
_______
Last edited by seeds on Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by surreptitious57 »

The Big Bang was a quantum expansion so came from something way smaller than any dot that one can see
But what it came from would have had some dimension because a Universe cannot come from zero volume
theory
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 7:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by theory »

David Handeye wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:42 pm Hi everybody,

Consider universe as infinite. This means it has no beginning, no ending, no borders, no center. In every point you will be in it, you will have infinite points in front of you, infinite points behind you, infinite points below you, inifinite points above you, you will have inifinite points everywhere around you, so that you'll be the center of the universe. If you go on the Moon, you'll be in the same conditions, so that in an infinite universe there are infinite centers at any time, not none. But center can be only one, so infinite centers infinite universes. But infinite has neither beginning nor ending, so there can't be even two infinites, and universe can't be infinite.
Finitude is not something of substance. Finitude as a concept originates from pattern recognition. A pattern is the foundation of the concept finitude by the "begin" that is introduced by an observer. Finitude requires activity of an observer before it can be considered.

The counting that occurs in pattern recognition is mathematics which is a mental construct and thus a perception.

The 'begin' (start of a pattern or 'value') that is introduced by the observing mind implies that what preceded it lays beyond it from the perspective of the individual. In a way would that imply that the origin of life is the purpose of life. What preceded a begin on a fundamental level logically knows no end, which results in the idea of infinity.
theory
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 7:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by theory »

Atla wrote: Fri Nov 23, 2018 11:55 am By the way, the key to parapsychology is QM, quantum biology.

It's a completely taboo topic. My conjecture is: after it was becoming obvious that several parapsychological effects are miniscule but very real, some powers that be banned the entire topic in the West.
On two science and philosophy forums my recent (2021) topics concerning a question related to quantum biology were closed or moved to off-topic.

On philosophy.stackexchange.com a question related to the 'neutrino-biological cell theory of life and consciousness' (quantum theory of consciousness) was closed as being 'off-topic'. I wondered how that could be since the topic concerned a philosophical question related to a potential origin for consciousness and there were already several serious replies.

My question: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/qu ... utrino-and

Image
Questions:
  1. are there serious indications that neutrinos can be the origin of consciousness? If so/not, why?
  2. what philosophical ground would there be for the idea that neutrinos (something outside the scope of the individual) is the origin of consciousness?
Recently on forums.space.com a topic with the subject that the Big Bang theory is considered a religion by an increasing amount of scientists, was removed (not closed, like other topics). I firstly posted a topic about the neutrino-biological cell theory of life (quantum theory of consciousness). Perhaps it was of influence for the later removal of the topic about the Big Bang theory.

Information about the removal of the Big Bang theory topic: viewtopic.php?p=514365#p514365
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by Terrapin Station »

David Handeye wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:42 pm Hi everybody,

Consider universe as infinite. This means it has no beginning, no ending, no borders, no center. In every point you will be in it, you will have infinite points in front of you, infinite points behind you, infinite points below you, inifinite points above you, you will have inifinite points everywhere around you, so that you'll be the center of the universe. If you go on the Moon, you'll be in the same conditions, so that in an infinite universe there are infinite centers at any time, not none. But center can be only one, so infinite centers infinite universes. But infinite has neither beginning nor ending, so there can't be even two infinites, and universe can't be infinite.
39 pages so far off of this post.

smh
Atla
Posts: 6665
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by Atla »

theory wrote: Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:42 am
Atla wrote: Fri Nov 23, 2018 11:55 am By the way, the key to parapsychology is QM, quantum biology.

It's a completely taboo topic. My conjecture is: after it was becoming obvious that several parapsychological effects are miniscule but very real, some powers that be banned the entire topic in the West.
On two science and philosophy forums my recent (2021) topics concerning a question related to quantum biology were closed or moved to off-topic.

On philosophy.stackexchange.com a question related to the 'neutrino-biological cell theory of life and consciousness' (quantum theory of consciousness) was closed as being 'off-topic'. I wondered how that could be since the topic concerned a philosophical question related to a potential origin for consciousness and there were already several serious replies.

My question: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/qu ... utrino-and

Image
Questions:
  1. are there serious indications that neutrinos can be the origin of consciousness? If so/not, why?
  2. what philosophical ground would there be for the idea that neutrinos (something outside the scope of the individual) is the origin of consciousness?
Recently on forums.space.com a topic with the subject that the Big Bang theory is considered a religion by an increasing amount of scientists, was removed (not closed, like other topics). I firstly posted a topic about the neutrino-biological cell theory of life (quantum theory of consciousness). Perhaps it was of influence for the later removal of the topic about the Big Bang theory.

Information about the removal of the Big Bang theory topic: viewtopic.php?p=514365#p514365
What I wrote was a general thing (well at least nowadays physicists are slowly getting more open-minded, and those powers that be are weakening). But on top of that, you have a personal persecutory complex coupled with messiah syndrome, have you not?
theory
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 7:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by theory »

Atla wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 7:55 am What I wrote was a general thing (well at least nowadays physicists are slowly getting more open-minded, and those powers that be are weakening). But on top of that, you have a personal persecutory complex coupled with messiah syndrome, have you not?
When it concerns the closing of a question related to the philosophical nature of quantum biology and consciousness on philosophy.stackexchange.com, don't you find that a bit strange? It actually occurred to me to have a similar origin as what you described to be applicable when it concerns quantum biology being a taboo, to such an extent, that information about it is actually efficiently boycotted in 2021.

For example: why is there no buzz about the neutrino-biological cell theory of life and consciousness, or the quantum theory of consciousness? Imagine that it is the correct theory. From that perspective, it seems odd that it is being suppressed. Even if it is incorrect, at least it should be provided with a fair chance.

With regard your idea's about me. Can you provide a substantiation?

1) What is the basis for the idea that I have a personal persecutory complex?

2) What is the basis for the idea that I have a messiah syndrome?

Please provide exact references to text that I shared. If you do not and try to evade my request, that is because you made an unsubstantiated claim about another person, which is not a nice thing to do. Having a feeling out of nowhere that may be false for whatever reason, is not an excuse.
Atla
Posts: 6665
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by Atla »

theory wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:58 am
Atla wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 7:55 am What I wrote was a general thing (well at least nowadays physicists are slowly getting more open-minded, and those powers that be are weakening). But on top of that, you have a personal persecutory complex coupled with messiah syndrome, have you not?
When it concerns the closing of a question related to the philosophical nature of quantum biology and consciousness on philosophy.stackexchange.com, don't you find that a bit strange? It actually occurred to me to have a similar origin as what you described to be applicable when it concerns quantum biology being a taboo, to such an extent, that information about it is actually efficiently boycotted in 2021.

For example: why is there no buzz about the neutrino-biological cell theory of life and consciousness, or the quantum theory of consciousness? Imagine that it is the correct theory. From that perspective, it seems odd that it is being suppressed. Even if it is incorrect, at least it should be provided with a fair chance.

With regard your idea's about me. Can you provide a substantiation?

1) What is the basis for the idea that I have a personal persecutory complex?

2) What is the basis for the idea that I have a messiah syndrome?

Please provide exact references to text that I shared. If you do not and try to evade my request, that is because you made an unsubstantiated claim about another person, which is not a nice thing to do. Having a feeling out of nowhere that may be false for whatever reason, is not an excuse.
Any quantum theory of consciousness is arguably nonsense, as everything is quantum.

I found your introductory topic to be an amusing tale of how they specifically target you to try to repress your insights that would change everything, then again I couldn't be bothered to read for more than 30 seconds so of course it's not a greatly substantiated claim. :)
theory
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue May 11, 2021 7:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by theory »

Atla wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:13 am Any quantum theory of consciousness is arguably nonsense, as everything is quantum.

I found your introductory topic to be an amusing tale of how they specifically target you to try to repress your insights that would change everything, then again I couldn't be bothered to read for more than 30 seconds so of course it's not a greatly substantiated claim. :)
When one is to explain consciousness and seeks that explanation in Quantum Mechanics, then the reference 'quantum theory of consciousness' is applicable.

It would not matter. The questions were serious and the 'neutrino biological cell theory of life and consciousness' is simply a serious theory that could potentially be valid, or perhaps just partly so.

With regard 'my insights' that would change things, not at any moment such a claim or suggestion was expressed. Officially, the motive for the attacks that have occurred (https://psyreporter.com/air-pollution/), is an actual mystery and the events are referenced as such. Not at a single moment the suggestion was made that the motive has been to suppress 'my insights'.

I understand that people may automatically adapt a sort of self-defense position, just to prevent the absurd personal attack events to be abused for whatever (political) motive, for example for pushing an idea, whatever that may be. Or perhaps even, anything that I would potentially say, to have a sort of unfair advantage because of those events.

I have communicated clearly and repeatedly, perhaps literally over 1000x times, that I have no political, ideological or religious motives. I have no intention in any way to tell other people what they should think, belief, or how they should live.

I understand that many other people do have emotions and feelings resulting in political ideas/ideologies, however, I do not have such emotions or urges because I am purely interested in theory and by my interest to view things from as many perspectives possible, I intend to be neutral.

When it concerns psychiatry, it appears that they have attempted to divert attention away from them by playing a 'Jesus joke', among other things, and that it ultimately may explain the origin of all the fuzz. In a way, what has been observed, was a fight to survive by a practice that can't stand on its own legs. This is just my 'two cents' with regard what happened. Officially, it has remained a mystery.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6263
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by FlashDangerpants »

theory wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:58 am 1) What is the basis for the idea that I have a personal persecutory complex?
You had an acute episode where you trashed your own apartment, then you went through something called Decompensation and you constructed a delusion about people persecuting you with air pollution to explain damage which had actually been caused by you.

You really do need to be talking to a medical professional about this, not randoms on the internet.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Universe can't be infinite.

Post by bahman »

David Handeye wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:42 pm Hi everybody,

Consider universe as infinite. This means it has no beginning, no ending, no borders, no center. In every point you will be in it, you will have infinite points in front of you, infinite points behind you, infinite points below you, inifinite points above you, you will have inifinite points everywhere around you, so that you'll be the center of the universe. If you go on the Moon, you'll be in the same conditions, so that in an infinite universe there are infinite centers at any time, not none. But center can be only one, so infinite centers infinite universes. But infinite has neither beginning nor ending, so there can't be even two infinites, and universe can't be infinite.
The universe in fact is infinite otherwise it is surrounded by something. What is that thing that surrounds the universe?
Post Reply