Universe can't be infinite.

[TimeSeeker]

Fizzles that dizzle and dally ...not worth a pinch of salt with what comes down to man's predicament where it comes to entropy.

I'm probably gonna have to call it a night.

Yeah... no

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh-My-God_particle

[TimeSeeker]

Which implies a start of time.

https://www.universetoday.com/38195/osc ... se-theory/

Within the bounds of testability/falsifiability there can be NO infinities.

Because you can neither test NOR falsify infinity.

[attofishpi]

Fizzles that dizzle and dally ...not worth a pinch of salt with what comes down to man's predicament where it comes to entropy.

I'm probably gonna have to call it a night.

Yeah... no

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh-My-God_particle

Er yeah - im sure that fucker zapped its way out of the Solar system near as fast as it entered it.

[devans99]

Which implies a start of time.

https://www.universetoday.com/38195/osc ... se-theory/

Thats what I believe in. The start and end of time are co-incidental at the big bang / big crunch.

If you think about it, the only place in the universe we could get enough matter/energy for the big bang is the big crunch. So it must be true.

[TimeSeeker]

Thats what I believe in. The start and end of time are co-incidental at the big bang / big crunch.

If you think about it, the only place in the universe we could get enough matter/energy for the big bang is the big crunch. So it must be true.

Cool theory.

It just needs a good story around the accelerating EXPANSION if a crunch is ever coming

[devans99]

Thats what I believe in. The start and end of time are co-incidental at the big bang / big crunch.

If you think about it, the only place in the universe we could get enough matter/energy for the big bang is the big crunch. So it must be true.

Cool theory.

It just needs a good story around the accelerating EXPANSION if a crunch is ever coming

Well expansion has slowed down in the past (at the end of the era of inflation), so maybe it will slow again.

[Greylorn Ell]

TS,
If you can take a few minutes away from your many half-vast studies into number theory, look up the definition of "crackpot."

Goodbye. -GL

[TimeSeeker]

TS,
If you can take a few minutes away from your many half-vast studies into number theory, look up the definition of "crackpot."

Goodbye. -GL

Gaylord, is ad hominems how you avoid tackling the argument, proof, references and body of knowledge I've referred you to?

Which part of this type-theoretic mathematical object doesn't exist: https://repl.it/repls/BusyInterestingVisitors
And while we are having fun - God is Infinite, right?

require 'singleton'

class Infinity

include Singleton

def self.method_missing(*args)
return self
end

end

puts("Infinity + 5 = #{Infinity + 5}")
puts("Infinity + Infinity = #{Infinity + Infinity}")

class God < Infinity
end
puts("God + 5 = #{God + 5}")

[Atla]

Thats what I believe in. The start and end of time are co-incidental at the big bang / big crunch.

If you think about it, the only place in the universe we could get enough matter/energy for the big bang is the big crunch. So it must be true.

The way I usually imagine it is that at the end of the universe (or at least the observable part), some portion of the universe (but less than 100%) is compressed into two black holes: a matter and an anti-matter one. And then they collide, which is both the Big Crunch and Big Bang. In fact there is only this Big Crunch and Big Bang, time isn't cyclical, it's merely circular.

Making the universe one big timeless "perpetuum mobile" except it never actually moves, never changes.

Really, the idea of a "Beginning" is just a thousands of years old myth.

[devans99]

Thats what I believe in. The start and end of time are co-incidental at the big bang / big crunch.

If you think about it, the only place in the universe we could get enough matter/energy for the big bang is the big crunch. So it must be true.

The way I usually imagine it is that at the end of the universe (or at least the observable part), some portion of the universe (but less than 100%) is compressed into two black holes: a matter and an anti-matter one. And then they collide, which is both the Big Crunch and Big Bang. In fact there is only this Big Crunch and Big Bang, time isn't cyclical, it's merely circular.

Making the universe one big timeless "perpetuum mobile" except it never actually moves, never changes.

Really, the idea of a "Beginning" is just a thousands of years old myth.

So you are a Eternalist and a Finitist? How come you say the beginning of the universe is a myth? A circle has an arbitrary beginning point.

[Atla]

So you are a Eternalist and a Finitist? How come you say the beginning of the universe is a myth? A circle has an arbitrary beginning point.

Yes, I'd say Eternalist and Finitist. (Well, I also think that our finite universe is part of an infinite "multiversal" field, but that's beside the point here, another topic.)

It's merely a convention to say that the observable universe begins with the Big Bang and ends with the Big Crunch. But from an absolutist point of view, there is no beginning point on a circle, because it's arbitrary. From an absolutist point of view, the universe just sits there in the eternal now, and has no actual beginning or end.

[devans99]

So you are a Eternalist and a Finitist? How come you say the beginning of the universe is a myth? A circle has an arbitrary beginning point.

Yes, I'd say Eternalist and Finitist. (Well, I also think that our finite universe is part of an infinite "multiversal" field, but that's beside the point here, another topic.)

It's merely a convention to say that the observable universe begins with the Big Bang and ends with the Big Crunch. But from an absolutist point of view, there is no beginning point on a circle, because it's arbitrary. From an absolutist point of view, the universe just sits there in the eternal now, and has no actual beginning or end.

At last some sense! I agree with you on the above.

The problem I have is God. The universe looks designed so I think God probably exists, but designed seems incompatible with eternal. Unless God is somehow timeless and created the eternal universe timelessly. But how does anything change without time?

[TimeSeeker]

At last some sense! I agree with you on the above.

The problem I have is God. The universe looks designed so I think God probably exists, but designed seems incompatible with eternal. Unless God is somehow timeless and created the eternal universe timelessly. But how does anything change without time?

God is not timeless.
And GodGod (the God that created God) is not timeless either.
Neither is GodGodGod.
Nor GodGodGodGod

Maybe GodGodGodGod.......<infinity>God is timeless.

Philosophers.

Sweeping infinite regress under the carpet since EVER.

[Atla]

At last some sense! I agree with you on the above.

The problem I have is God. The universe looks designed so I think God probably exists, but designed seems incompatible with eternal. Unless God is somehow timeless and created the eternal universe timelessly. But how does anything change without time?

Well if you ask me, when all is said and done, we are left with two major options (unprovable guesses):
- God did it, using magic
- our finite universe is part of an infinite "multiversal" field / multiverse

(Some desperate folks are also quite fond of the simulated universe idea, but that one is quite unlikely, and actually collapses into one of the two above options.)

I don't believe in magic, I think it's best to extrapolate from what we already know exists, our universe. So multiversal field / multiverse it is, as the best guess.

In an infinite multiversal field, the probability of our world accuring is 100%, so that takes care of the fine-tuning problem.

(Which brings up the next question: yeah but why this world out of the infinite possibilites, is there something "unique" about it, in some sense?)

[devans99]

At last some sense! I agree with you on the above.

The problem I have is God. The universe looks designed so I think God probably exists, but designed seems incompatible with eternal. Unless God is somehow timeless and created the eternal universe timelessly. But how does anything change without time?

Well if you ask me, when all is said and done, we are left with two major options (unprovable guesses):
- God did it, using magic
- our finite universe is part of an infinite "multiversal" field / multiverse

(Some desperate folks are also quite fond of the simulated universe idea, but that one is quite unlikely, and actually collapses into one of the two above options.)

I don't believe in magic, I think it's best to extrapolate from what we already know exists, our universe. So multiversal field / multiverse it is, as the best guess.

In an infinite multiversal field, the probability of our world accuring is 100%, so that takes care of the fine-tuning problem.

(Which brings up the next question: yeah but why this world out of the infinite possibilites, is there something "unique" about it, in some sense?)

I believe Actual Infinity to be impossible so an actually infinite multiverse(?) is impossible. It would have to be a multiverse of finite size for me.

There is also a problem with any multiverse. All the other universes will statistically look like this one. We have a sample size of one saying so (our universe). Also, all universes end up at the same density/pressure so they all look alike in terms of forces/particles. IE the multiverse and all universes look designed.

And finally, if we live in a multiverse, there is an argument that any multiverse would of been designed by God.

So I am still stuck on:
- God seems to be required
- Eternalism seems to be true
- The two are seemingly incompatible