quote:You are asking me what is the mathematical error in the Standard Model. Well, that is obvious to me. It's simply a fundamental flaw in the understanding of the relation of infinite and finite.
The Standard Model makes no statements on the relation of the finite and the infinite, hence it is nonsensical to point out this "flaw". If you are referring to the Standard Model of particle physics, that describes particle interactions. If you are referring to the Standard Model of cosmology, then that describes the evolution of the universe. There is no discussion of the relation between the finite and the infinite.
quote:Infinity is, of course, expressed with a zero
This makes no sense. Infinity is not expressed with a zero.
quote:Whereas the real singularities are under everybody's nose. They are called the past and the future. Everybody in that sense lives inside a moving black hole of the present squeezed in between the two event horizons. Black holes ain't as black as they are painted after all.
The past and the future are not singularities. The past and the future are simply two opposite directions in the temporal dimension.
quote:Well, my friend, the notion of evolution belongs to the realm of the finite
I don't see why, I can describe the evolution of infinitely large systems mathematically, so there is no a priori relationship between being finite and evolving.
quote:while the universe firmly remains in the category of the infinite.
Why does the universe belong in the category of the infinite?
quote:Thus the fatal flaw of the model is clearly demonstrated in your own words here.
No, what has been displayed is: (a)An assertion that evolution is related to finite things. (b)Another assertion that the universe is in the category of the infinite.
quote:The nature of that fatal mathematical flaw is attributing to the infinite all the qualities of the finite in the manner described in my initial post you had the courtesy to completely miss the meaning of, my friend.
Well it is very difficult to understand your first post, since it contains statements like "Infinity is expressed with a zero", which to me reads as a non-statement like "The colour of black is white".
I've nothing to add to Catholic Scientist's informative post. I just wish to explain the term manifold, in case the Wikipedia page is not sufficient.
Essentially a manifold is an shape where you can label the points using a set of real numbers. The number of real numbers needed is called the dimension of a manifold.
For example the Earth's surface would be a two-dimensional manifold as any point on its surface can be labelled using two real numbers (longitude and latitude).
The space of all states of a classical particle is also a manifold, any state can be described using six real numbers (six-dimensional manifold), three for the position of the particle and another three for the value of its momenta in each direction.
Some shapes (or spaces, which is the technical term) are too bizarre to be described using real numbers, although the use of these spaces is limited in physics.
If the manifold has a notion of distance between its points, then it is called a Riemannian manifold or a Pseudo-Riemannian manifold if one of the dimensions is time. The surface of the Earth is a Riemannian manifold, since there is a distance between points on the Earth's surface. The space of states is not, as you can't really say how far states are from each other.
How the distances work on a particular manifold is given by an object called the metric. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity basically says that the energy density of matter determines the metric of spacetime.
That is, the energy density of matter at a point affects how the rules of distance work near that point.