Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   On Infinity
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 56 (412641)
07-25-2007 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by numnuts
07-25-2007 4:34 PM


Re: Question on infinity
That's what I was thinking in the first place...matter/energy creates the ripple.
That's not really it tho. Its more like the ripples create matter. Well, the ripples are matter. But the ripples are not there because the existence of matter causes them, the ripples cause the existence of matter.
The matter-created ripples that I think that you're thinking of, like the bowling ball on a bedsheet analogy, are from the affects of mass on spacetime and happen on a totally different length scale than we are talking typing about with these ripples.
Is time the 4th dimension or are you talking about another spacial dimension?
Yes, the 4th dem is time.
As for your 2d model being 4d. I am assuming you mean that the flat plane is not really flat but has some unknown depth.
Well if its flat it doesn't have depth
One of the problems with analogies is that people like to add in extra stuff or bring their own presumptions to the analogy.
Its easier to understand if yu drop all those presumptions and take the analogy at face value.
I'm not going to re-type the analogies here so read up on some of the threads and pages you now know of and pay attention to the analogies at face value.
After you learn some more, then ask more questions or start a new thread.
As far as 4d being represented by 2d, its easier to imagine if you reduce the number of demensions. But basically it comes down to the maths and how things are calculated and represented.
For example, lets say we have a cube of LxWxH.
We could represent all three of those deminsions as one deminsion: X
Now, we can appply mathematical funtions to X and calculate with it as one deminsion, like say, 2X or X^2 etc. But that one deminsion, X, represents all three deminsions of the cube and that will affect the results of our calculations.
So now to a visual analogy, and say I draw the line X: ______________________________
We can double or square the line, etc, and it will change it, but we must remember that what we are doing this too is actually a cube and the line is only representing that.
The same goes with the 2d's actually reprsenting four of them (or at least that is how I understand it ((I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong)))
Hope that helps a little with the analogies.
Ask away...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by numnuts, posted 07-25-2007 4:34 PM numnuts has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by IamJoseph, posted 07-27-2007 2:29 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 47 of 56 (412642)
07-25-2007 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by numnuts
07-25-2007 4:34 PM


Re: Question on infinity
That's what I was thinking in the first place...matter/energy creates the ripple.
No, in the analogy that CS is using, the ripples are matter/energy. And these ripples can group together to create much larger ripples or disturbances. In your picture of the heavy ball on the wet towel, you asked whether the ball was on, under or in the towel, so to speak. Well, in CS's analogy, the ball is made up of ripples in the towel... there is actually only the towel! In other words, there is only space-time. You are I are made of space-time itself!
(I must admit that we're being a little loose here, and extending the concept of space-time to include all of the quantum fields, not just the metric)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by numnuts, posted 07-25-2007 4:34 PM numnuts has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by RAZD, posted 07-25-2007 7:50 PM cavediver has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 56 (412645)
07-25-2007 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by numnuts
07-25-2007 4:47 PM


Re: Question on infinity
Another question on the flat fabric. I have seen a demonstration on the warping of spacetime with a person holding and stretching a wet paper towel. Then a ball is placed in the middle and the indentation the ball makes is the ripple or the warping of space time.
Different ripples. That's for showing how gravity warps space-time.
We're talking about how matter exists in space-time. The ripples in the wet paper towel would be matter existing. For the ball to be made of matter, it would have to be a ripple of the wet paper towel, not some other thing altogether.
Make sense?
My next question is should I imagine the ball (a planet) actually sitting on top or underneath the fabric or actually existing inside the fabric itself. In other words like the same ball in the middle of two wet paper towels? I have always wondered that.
The ball is made of the paper towel. The ball if composed of towel-stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by numnuts, posted 07-25-2007 4:47 PM numnuts has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by numnuts, posted 07-25-2007 6:17 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 56 (412646)
07-25-2007 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by cavediver
07-25-2007 1:56 PM


Hi cavediver,
How have you been?
Thanks for the compliment.
I guess I'm just trying to pay it forward with all the time and effort you've spent explaining things to me.
I figure I can handle the easy beginner questions and then when they start to catch up and pass me, shout for help
Thanks man.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by cavediver, posted 07-25-2007 1:56 PM cavediver has not replied

  
numnuts
Junior Member (Idle past 6090 days)
Posts: 19
Joined: 06-20-2007


Message 50 of 56 (412659)
07-25-2007 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by New Cat's Eye
07-25-2007 5:06 PM


Re: Question on infinity
CS and Cavediver,
Thank you!
I was completely off base with how I was thinking about it and I'm not sure I fully understand how to think about it now but I will do some research like you asked. I think I understand most of your points but not all of them.
I am glad on one hand that you have corrected my distorted view but I am also a little confused which is why I'm asking questions. Rather than continuing to think in the wrong terms I would much rather try and grasp reality.
As you can surely tell by now I am new to this but eager to learn. I appreciate your time and response! Gotta run

I think therefore I am...busy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-25-2007 5:06 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 51 of 56 (412677)
07-25-2007 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by cavediver
07-25-2007 5:02 PM


(OT Zen?)
.. there is actually only the towel!
Become one with the towel? (Always travel with a towel: Hitchhiker's Guide)
(ducks)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by cavediver, posted 07-25-2007 5:02 PM cavediver has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 52 of 56 (413061)
07-27-2007 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by tudwell
03-16-2007 12:36 PM


There is no infinity in the universe, not anywhere, and not in any levels. Space is not infinite, nor is matter, time or enegy. The criteria for infinity is 'no changes', and that none of its parts can be finite. You can't add $5 to an infinite amount of $.
Infinity is Sci-Fi. It is resorted to as a deflection from failed theories and premises, used to justify the unjustifiable. One must thus examine all theories and see if they work in a finite universe; if not - its should be discarded from the science sector.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by tudwell, posted 03-16-2007 12:36 PM tudwell has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by RAZD, posted 07-27-2007 5:37 PM IamJoseph has not replied
 Message 55 by Chiroptera, posted 07-27-2007 6:05 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 53 of 56 (413062)
07-27-2007 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by New Cat's Eye
07-25-2007 5:02 PM


Re: Question on infinity
quote:
But the ripples are not there because the existence of matter causes them, the ripples cause the existence of matter.
This action illustrates a 'change' - which begates infinity. Also, the the matter can be infinite if created by a finite item - and thus, vice versa. Additionally, if the product produce is finite, the precedent host is finite.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-25-2007 5:02 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-01-2007 12:37 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 54 of 56 (413114)
07-27-2007 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by IamJoseph
07-27-2007 2:24 PM


Infinity is NOT "no changes" ... know how?
The criteria for infinity is 'no changes', and that none of its parts can be finite. You can't add $5 to an infinite amount of $.
Logically and mathematically false. Infinity is unlimited therefore you can add to it. The result is still infinity (but it is not necessarily the same infinity). The mathematical concept of a infinite series is one where the sum total increases without bound while continually adding finite elements to the sum total. This contradicts your position.
Your "no changes" is a false definition and part of the problem with your position. It does not show up in any of the above definitions. Immeasurable, unlimited, unbounded, not finite, these are the criteria for infinite.
No webpage found at provided URL: in·fin·i·te -adjective
1. immeasurably great: an infinite capacity for forgiveness.
2. indefinitely or exceedingly great: infinite sums of money.
3. unlimited or unmeasurable in extent of space, duration of time, etc.: the infinite nature of outer space.
4. unbounded or unlimited; boundless; endless: God's infinite mercy.
5. Mathematics.
- a. not finite.
- b. (of a set) having elements that can be put into one-to-one correspondence with a subset that is not the given set.
-noun
6. something that is infinite.
7. Mathematics. an infinite quantity or magnitude.
8. the boundless regions of space.
9. the Infinite or the Infinite Being, God.
You do not get to redefine terms to create straw-man arguments that the item defined by the term does not exist: all you prove is that your (false) concept does not exist, while the actual (true) concept is unaffected.
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by IamJoseph, posted 07-27-2007 2:24 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 56 (413122)
07-27-2007 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by IamJoseph
07-27-2007 2:24 PM


Be careful, IaJ. Several of us have advanced degrees in mathematics, and others are pretty knowledgeable in this area, too. If you want to learn what "infinity" means, then we can teach you. However, if you insist that you know what you are talking about (and I assure you that you don't), then you are going to get spanked as badly as you are being spanked by Brian and arachnophilia in the archaeology threads.

I've done everything the Bible says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff! -- Ned Flanders

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by IamJoseph, posted 07-27-2007 2:24 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 56 (413796)
08-01-2007 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by IamJoseph
07-27-2007 2:29 PM


Re: Question on infinity
This action illustrates a 'change' - which begates infinity.
What does begates mean? I couldn't find it in the dictionary.
From Message 52:
The criteria for infinity is 'no changes', and that none of its parts can be finite.
That is false. 'No Change' is not the criteria for infinity (you can see RAZD's post for the definition).
Now, back to what you said, keeping in mind your misconception about infinity being changeless:
This action illustrates a 'change' - which begates infinity.
Oohhhh... Did you mean to type negates?
Change does not negate infinity. Where did you get this idea? Are you just making stuff up or is this a real concept that you are typing about? Got a link you can give me?
Also, the the matter can be infinite if created by a finite item - and thus, vice versa.
I'm having trouble making sense out of this sentance as well. Are you sure you meant can? And I guess the first 'the' should be a then?
Can you take a little more care in typing your replies to me so I don't have to waste time deciphering them, please?
I think you're trying to say that if a finite item created all of matter then there cannot be an infinite amount of matter.
I don't have a problem with a finite universe, so... I guess I don't know why you're telling me this.
But thanks anyways
It seems that you dislike science and are trying to prove it wrong, or something. Why it that?
From my point of view, you're just exemplifying your misconceptions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by IamJoseph, posted 07-27-2007 2:29 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024