Infinity as Change

[Janoah]

"One line is composed of infinite, thus multiple, lines is a set. All lines are sets and these sets contain infinite further sets."


In shorter terms: a line is a set.

but this line has a beginning and an end, it is not endless.
The line can be divided infinitely, but this is not an actual infinity, but a process in time.

According to Einstein's theory of relativity, absolute simultaneity generally loses its meaning. Therefore, actual, simultaneous infinity loses its meaning.
And about potential infinity, a process in time, explained by Aristotle.

[Eodnhoj7]

But 'you' do NOT YET KNOW who 'I' am. Until you, literally, become Self aware, then you will NOT KNOW WHY your sentence here is False, Wrong, and Incorrect.



So what?

You keep repeating this "forms repeat" message, but WHY?

What will understanding this actually achieve?



Yet here 'you' are unable to provide thee True, Right, and Correct answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?'

What, EXACTLY, is this 'self', which is 'reflecting'?

1. If I do not know who you are yet then there is a distinction between you and me.

If 'you' still do not yet know who 'you' nor 'I' am, then so be it.

2. If forms repeat then we understand the universe as self aware, thus a form of consciousness exists beyond our own.

LOL So, 'you' somehow have concluded that 'you' have 'your' "own consciousness", and that that "consciousness" exists beyond or outside of the Universe's own Self awareness, or Consciousness.

Who, or what, by the way, does your use of the 'our' word here refer to, EXACTLY?

You keep asking questions, what do you hope this achieves?

That 'you', human beings, will start answering them OPEN and Honestly.

3. The point as it is.

Which is 'what', EXACTLY?

Or, can you NOT explain NOR elaborate on this ANY further?

What is the "true, right and correct answer to the question "who am I?""

In the visible, physical sense, the Universe.

In the non visible, spiritual sense, the Mind.

By the way, to 'me', your numbered responses do not appear to match up with ANY thing I said.

1. "You" and "I" shows a distinction.

2. Human consciousness exists as a subset of universal consciousness. Given human consciousness cannot observe the totality of universal consciousness, universal consciousness exists beyond human consciousness thus a distinction between the two occurs. "Our" references human consciousness given both you and me are human.

3. Who are you too judge whether responses to your questions are honest or not.

4. The point is "•"

5. Thus we are all connected.

[Eodnhoj7]

"One line is composed of infinite, thus multiple, lines is a set. All lines are sets and these sets contain infinite further sets."


In shorter terms: a line is a set.

but this line has a beginning and an end, it is not endless.
The line can be divided infinitely, but this is not an actual infinity, but a process in time.

According to Einstein's theory of relativity, absolute simultaneity generally loses its meaning. Therefore, actual, simultaneous infinity loses its meaning.
And about potential infinity, a process in time, explained by Aristotle.

And these beginning and ends are relative to an infinite number of beginnings and ends thus the beginning and end is a continuum. The line is a continuum of infinite points thus necessitating infinite lines between points.

The relationship of one infinity to another sets the foundation for one infinity as either a beginning or end point of another.

[Advocate]

[quote=Eodnhoj7 post_id=502534 time=1615828911 user_id=14533]
1. "You" and "I" shows a distinction.

2. Human consciousness exists as a subset of universal consciousness. Given human consciousness cannot observe the totality of universal consciousness, universal consciousness exists beyond human consciousness thus a distinction between the two occurs. "Our" references human consciousness given both you and me are human.

3. Who are you too judge whether responses to your questions are honest or not.

4. The point is "•"

5. Thus we are all connected.
[/quote]

Any meaningful use of the term consciousness is mind-bound and any meaningful use of the term mind is brain bound and any meaningful use of the term brain is biological. All brains are embodied. That means they have a unique perspective. That means ideas like universal consciousness are fucking stupid.

[Advocate]

[quote=Eodnhoj7 post_id=502543 time=1615829533 user_id=14533]
And these beginning and ends are relative to an infinite number of beginnings and ends thus the beginning and end is a continuum. The line is a continuum of infinite points thus necessitating infinite lines between points.

The relationship of one infinity to another sets the foundation for one infinity as either a beginning or end point of another.
[/quote]

In order to be manipulated, ie useful, a thing must have proscribed boundaries. Infinity is not that sort of thing, except in language. You can language about it all you want but you're never going to get any closer to understanding it until you simply substitute "etcetera". Infinity is a direction - keep going. It is not a specific thing that you can math or reason about, much less do any real world work. The most useful it can be is as a placeholder for an indefinite amount of ignorance.

[Janoah]

The relationship of one infinity to another sets the foundation for one infinity as either a beginning or end point of another.

After all, I told you that absolute simultaneity has no meaning, so actual, simultaneous infinity has no meaning, isn't that clear?

[Advocate]

[quote=Janoah post_id=502553 time=1615832218 user_id=19679]
[quote=Eodnhoj7 post_id=502543 time=1615829533 user_id=14533]

The relationship of one infinity to another sets the foundation for one infinity as either a beginning or end point of another.
[/quote]

After all, I told you that absolute simultaneity has no meaning, so actual, simultaneous infinity has no meaning, isn't that clear?
[/quote]

Pretending to do any operation on a thing that has impossibly indefinite boundaries is snake oil. That which cannot be defined with precision cannot be either recognized or manipulated.

[Skepdick]

Pretending to do any operation on a thing that has impossibly indefinite boundaries is snake oil. That which cannot be defined with precision cannot be either recognized or manipulated.

You may want to rethink that.

Infinite sets that admit fast exhaustive search

If that's too technical for you, that's searching infinite data in finite time.

[Advocate]

[quote=Skepdick post_id=502560 time=1615835713 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=502554 time=1615832938 user_id=15238]
Pretending to do any operation on a thing that has impossibly indefinite boundaries is snake oil. That which cannot be defined with precision cannot be either recognized or manipulated.
[/quote]
You may want to rethink that.

[url=https://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~mhe/papers/exhaustive.pdf]Infinite sets that admit fast exhaustive search[/url]

If that's too technical for you, that's searching infinite data in finite time.
[/quote]

No it's not. Infinity IS indefinite. Any construct that says otherwise is either simple fraud or is an epistemologically unsupportable fantasy with not even a single potential real world use. There is literally nothing that the word infinity can possibly do for us but stand in for ignorance. There are no exceptions.

infinity == indefinite == ignorance == unknown unknowns

[Skepdick]

No it's not. Infinity IS indefinite. Any construct that says otherwise is either lying or is an epistemologically unsupportable fantasy with not even a single potential real world use. There is literally nothing that the word infinity can possibly do for us but stand in for ignorance. There are no exceptions.

infinity == indefinite == ignorance

I was wrong exactly like you are wrong now.

Which infinity are you referring to? There are so many.

[Advocate]

[quote=Skepdick post_id=502562 time=1615836068 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=502561 time=1615835793 user_id=15238]
No it's not. Infinity IS indefinite. Any construct that says otherwise is either lying or is an epistemologically unsupportable fantasy with not even a single potential real world use. There is literally nothing that the word infinity can possibly do for us but stand in for ignorance. There are no exceptions.

infinity == indefinite == ignorance
[/quote]
I was wrong exactly like you are wrong now.

Which infinity are you referring to?
[/quote]

There are no such things as multiple intelligences, multiple universes, or multiple infinities. Each of those Means a generality.

[Skepdick]

There are no such things as multiple intelligences, multiple universes, or multiple infinities. Each of those Means a generality.

OK, then explain why some infinites can be exhaustively searched in finite time.

[Advocate]

[quote=Skepdick post_id=502566 time=1615836272 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=502564 time=1615836141 user_id=15238]
There are no such things as multiple intelligences, multiple universes, or multiple infinities. Each of those Means a generality.
[/quote]
OK, then explain why some infinites can be exhaustively searched in finite time.
[/quote]

Infinity is not a searchable kind of thing. It's not a specific kind of thing. It cannot be defined, known, understood, managed, operated on, calculated, or literally anything else specific because it is in literally no way specific itself, and math, btw, is only useful as a language; like all languages, descriptive of actual experiences. You've got both a metaphysical and an epistemological problem there, neither of which is in any sense tractable.

[Skepdick]

Infinity is not a searchable kind of thing.

Blah blah blah

I just gave you an example of a searchable infinity.

[Advocate]

Also, there's no such thing as an infinite set and there's no such thing as a set that contains itself. Math isn't always meaningful. When you get to the point that you're discussing something that has no real-world correlation, you're doing work that's indistinguishable from fiction.