why is an infinite universe illogical?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by EmptyForceOfChi, Jul 11, 2007.

  1. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    if you think existence/the universe being infinite is illogical or wrong. could you please explain why that is your opinion?

    because in my personal opinion it is very logical and makes sense.


    there is X amount of energy in the universe (a hell of alot actualy). energy cannot be created only transformed. wich concludes that the energy that exists within the universe must have always existed in some way shape or form.

    this in turn must indicate that the universe has always existed in some way shape or form, because energy cannot exist if the universe does not. for energy to transform and exist we also therefore need space and time. so this also means that space time and energy must have always existed.


    hence why i suggest the universe has always existed and is infinite. do we not agree on this ?


    peace.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2007
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. peta9 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,326
    In the context of infinity, nothingness is logical and something is illogical. Nothingness has no before or after. So the visible universe is something and not really empty space which correlates to natural deductive reasoning of extensions. Also there exists death and that's even more compelling.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    why is nothingness logical? you cannot have nothing without something. the yin to the yang.

    if nothingness can have no before or after, why do you speculate that existence has a before or after?

    death is just a mere transformation. like the death of a star or the death of a lion. its a transformation of mass and energy, nothing more,



    peace.


    peace.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    I don't think that many people think of infinity as "illogical or wrong" so much as simply unable to grasp. The human mind can think the term, can even talk about it, even use it in mathematical calculations, but I don't think many people, if any, can actually grasp something being infinite.

    Baron Max
     
  8. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    yeah exactly. i have said this many times in the past. and i think thats why so many people dont like the idea of an infinite universe. because we as humans think of things in mortal and finite terms. with a start and an end.

    but we understand the concept of infinite. wich is all we need to count it as a possible answer to explain things.

    its a very simple concept yet so hard to actualy grasp and get your head around, it boggles the mind to actualy think deep into eternal existence without a start. the best we can do is usualy along the lines of "it had no start and always existed" because humans think in pictures and visions it frustrates to think of infinity.



    peace.
     
  9. PreverseBeing Registered Member

    Messages:
    24
    In my opinion infinity might be the only thing that can actually explain this universe from (if there were other universes) from interacting with others.
    hazy diagram;
    infinite:

    wow, this is fustrating... no pasting and it spaces apart, hopefully, THIS works.

    infinity:
    (our universe/dimension) <Infinity> (Other universe/dimention)

    no infinity:
    (our universe/dimention)(Other universe/dimension)


    If 2 universes/dimensions touches each other without boundaries, it would appear if the 2 universes/dimensions would be one. and objects would constantly cross each other into each other's universes/dimensions.
    So without infinity, I should have a few 1-dimension stick-people in my room right now. Or atleast there would be 1 or 2-dimension objects floating through space (imagine a star that looks like a very long line or a thin sheet of star)
    This is just a guess, like the Hindu genesis where an egg drops into a dark ocean, then it hatches in to the earth.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2007
  10. fadingCaptain are you a robot? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,762
    an actual infinite makes no sense. how can you have motion in space or time if it is actually infinite?

    potential infinite maybe. maybe eternal recurrance or something.

    for me, you have to be specific than 'inifinite' to make any sense. What does this infinite look like? What does it consist of?
     
  11. heliocentric Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
    From what i understand the universe probably isnt infinite as we first assumed, its more likely that it sort of curves back on itself.
    Kind of like if you walked in a straight line setting out from any point on the planet earth youd assume there was infinitely vast space lying in front of you. Although given enough time youd start to see the same landmarks and features and youd realise you were simply looping back on yourself.
    Having said that, on the quantum scale who knows how 'far down' reality actually goes, we still dont really know where reality really 'ends'.
     
  12. Smellsniffsniff Gravitomagnetism Heats the Sun Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    364
    If the universe have allready existed for eternity, then we would not have come to pass yet. Because an eternity cannot come to pass.

    We come from a nullarity, then existence of that required that a time passed, but what dimension that was time was unknown, so it became a singularity with one planck length in all directions, and the number of directions were infinite. Then naturally, time 2 passed. All dimensions expanded to time 2 at the loss of other dimension(s), In what order was irrelevant cause it was time independent whatever time was first it was reversed back into the singularity. In the same way time 3 etc. passed. There will be a singularity ones again, you'll just have to wait. All want and desire, multitude and freedom satisfied. The nullarity is the very last thing that will ever exist again.
    Nothing was satisfied.
     
  13. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    there is X amount of energy in the universe (a hell of alot actualy). energy cannot be created only transformed. wich concludes that the energy that exists within the universe must have always existed in some way shape or form.

    this in turn must indicate that the universe has always existed in some way shape or form, because energy cannot exist if the universe does not. for energy to transform and exist we also therefore need space and time. so this also means that space time and energy must have always existed.


    hence why i suggest the universe has always existed and is infinite. do we not agree on this ?


    peace.
     
  14. fadingCaptain are you a robot? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,762
    "for energy to transform and exist we also therefore need space and time. so this also means that space time and energy must have always existed."

    so you do not prescribe to the big bang model? what do you have in mind to replace it? Perhaps too far off topic but relevant if you want to go down that path. Do you agree that the universe is expanding? If space and time are integrated and space is expanding...how could they be infinite?

    Big bang itself presents hard to answer questions - Can something exist without time? If there were energy but no time, what state would it be in?

    What about a cyclical bouncing universe? Or MWI?

    I think it is more probable that reality is far stranger than you have presented and is beyond our current ability to comprehend. I know that doesn't add a lot of value to the discussion...but there it is.
     
  15. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848

    why would i want to replace the big bang model. the big bang does not explain the existence of the universe.

    space is expanding? sorry i didnt know it was, i thought the mass and energy within the universe was expanding want to show evidence for the actual fabric of space expanding? as far as i am aware we have no means to even detect space let alone show its expansion,


    and could you address my post please. can energy be created? if it can only be transformed then you obviously realsie it must have always existed.

    i cant answer the questions you asked and you knew i couldent.

    peace.
     
  16. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    That only holds true for the universe as it is NOW.
    There's nothing to say that prior to the big bang energy couldn't be created (not saying it necessarily could have been, but the laws of physics only hold for things as they are now, not at, or prior, to BB).
     
  17. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    but the only thing we have to work with is the laws of physics.

    isnt that right oli.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    peace.
     
  18. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Correct - and physics breaks down, comes to a full stop at the big bang: we can say NOTHING about what caused it.
    So far.
    Maybe never.
    So speculation about what was before it, what caused it and what "conditions" and "laws" were like at that time are simply that - speculations.
     
  19. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    but as far as the law of physics goes we have to assume that energy cannot be created therefore has always existed. unless we decide that the laws of physics dont apply.

    we have to remember that the big bang does not mean the start of existence full stop.


    peace.
     
  20. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    That's the point - the laws of physics don't apply at the big bang.
    Therefore it is possible that energy could have been created.
    Assuming that things were the same "before" the big bang is a no-no.

    As far as physics is concerned that's exactly what it means.
    The Big Bang gave birth to the laws of physics as we know them.
    And the laws of physics are what dictate how the universe evolved.
     
  21. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    why dont the laws of physics apply at the big bang, how do we know this?


    so again how do we know this? how did the big bang give birth to physics? how can you give birth to a law? sounds weak to me.

    peace.
     
  22. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Because none of physics works under the condition appertaining at the start (or at least at 10[sup]-42[/sup] of a second after the Big Bang).
    The maths doesn't work at all.

    It gave birth to the "conditions" that exist now (i.e. particle charges, masses, strength of gravity, etc. etc.) which the laws describe.
    That's all the"laws" of physics are - mathematical descriptions of how the universe works and is put together.
    If things were "made" differently, then the laws would be different...
     
  23. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    so instead of discarding it as flawed. we change the laws of physics?, not to my tastes,



    and this is proven how?



    peace.
     

Share This Page