Universe can't be infinite.

[Logik]

Here are some more lessons in grammar and semantics.

2 * 3 = 3 * 2 = 2 + 2 + 2 = 3 + 3

In English you could say:
* I have 3 bags with 2 apples each.
* I have 2 bags with 3 apples each.
* I have 6 apples

Now 0 * 1 = 1 * 0 = 0

In English you could say:
* I have 1 bag with no apples.
* I have no apples.

So why is it weird to say
* I have 0 bags with 1 apples each

So much for consistency

Both the concepts of 0 and ∞ are abstract.
If ∞ doesn't exist then neither does 0.

[devans99]

Here are some more lessons in grammar and semantics.

2 * 3 = 3 * 2 = 2 + 2 + 2 = 3 + 3

In English you could say:
* I have 3 bags with 2 apples each.
* I have 2 bags with 3 apples each.
* I have 6 apples

Now 0 * 1 = 1 * 0 = 0

In English you could say:
* I have 1 bag with no apples.
* I have no apples.

So why is it weird to say
* I have 0 bags with 1 apples each

So much for consistency

Both the concepts of 0 and ∞ are abstract.
If ∞ doesn't exist then neither does 0.

Zero represents absence of existence and it is perfectly consistent with our number system and reality. Zero is the absence of something and absences of things exist in reality. Magic numbers like infinity do not exist. Its very definition is contradictory:

infinity
noun
...
MATHEMATICS
a number greater than any assignable quantity or countable number (symbol ∞).
...

So in maths, infinity is a number greater than any number. Thats a contradiction; can't be a number AND greater than any number.

[Logik]

absences of things exist in reality

Read that again. Slowly.

[devans99]

absences of things exist in reality

Read that again. Slowly.

You can have zero rocks for example.

[Logik]

You can have zero rocks for example.

You can?

How can you tell if you are holding zero rocks or zero cocks?

[devans99]

You can have zero rocks for example.

You can?

How can you tell if you are holding zero rocks or zero cocks?

Holding zero of both.

Absence of something is part of everyday experience. Numbers greater than any number are not.

[Logik]

Holding zero of both.

Are you sure you aren't holding zero of infinitely many different objects?

Translated into Mathematics: 0 * ∞ = ?

[Logik]

Numbers greater than any number are not.

OK. So what is the largest number you can think of/calculate/write down?

[devans99]

Holding zero of both.

Are you sure you aren't holding zero of infinitely many different objects?

Translated into Mathematics: 0 * ∞ = ?

Infinity exists only in the mind. There cannot be an actual infinity of particles in the universe so there cannot be an actual infinite number of objects.

[Logik]

Infinity exists only in the mind.

No different to zero.

There cannot be an actual infinity of particles in the universe so there cannot be an actual infinite number of objects.

There cannot be zero particles in the universe either. For if there were zero particles you and I wouldn't be here.

[devans99]

Infinity exists only in the mind.

No different to zero.

There cannot be an actual infinity of particles in the universe so there cannot be an actual infinite number of objects.

There cannot be zero particles in the universe either. For if there were zero particles you and I wouldn't be here.

The absence of things is a real phenomenon. Quantities greater than any quantity are contradictory - so are not real. Nature does not do contradictions.

There could be a universe with zero particles in it; it would just be very boring.

[Logik]

The absence of things is a real phenomenon

The absence of fundamental particles is not.

There could be a universe with zero particles in it; it would just be very boring.

It wouldn't be a universe. And there certainly would be no entity to find any such "universe" "boring".

Let me know when you convince yourself that Mathematics is just another man-made language.

[devans99]

The absence of things is a real phenomenon

The absence of fundamental particles is not.

There could be a universe with zero particles in it; it would just be very boring.

It wouldn't be a universe. And there certainly would be no entity to find any such "universe" "boring".

Let me know when you convince yourself that Mathematics is just a language. It's man-made.

I think space comes to an end and beyond that there are no fundamental particles. Thats what dark energy maybe about; energy/particles intrinsic to 'empty space' which is not really empty.

If it had just real empty space (no dark energy/dark matter) and time; it would be an empty universe with zero particles. Such a thing could feasibly exist.

[Logik]

I think space comes to an end and beyond that there are no fundamental particles.....It would be an empty universe with zero particles. Such a thing could feasibly exist.

So after the "end" there is nothing? Is there an "end" to the nothingness?

If there is an end to the nothingness what comes after THAT? Less than nothing?
If there is no end to the nothingness then it's infinite?

So 0 = ∞ ?

[devans99]

I think space comes to an end and beyond that there are no fundamental particles.....It would be an empty universe with zero particles. Such a thing could feasibly exist.

So after the "end" there is nothing? Is there an "end" to the nothingness?

If there is an end to the nothingness what comes after THAT?
If there is no end to the nothingness then it's infinite?

If the nothingness is infinite then I guess 0 * ∞ = ∞

Well it seems that time itself might have begun in the big bang. Certainly near the singularity time would maybe even reach a halt. And spacetime has been expanding at roughly light speed (give or take the metric expansion space) for 14 billion years, so there are places beyond the big bang's light future cone that spacetime do not exist for. They may this nothingness would different properties to normal space - no space / time no matter/energy - just the philosopher's nothing. That nothingness is nothing so its incorrect to say it goes goes on forever - Its has no spacial dimension to go on forever.