BrainMeta'   Connectomics'  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Which Infinity do you prefer?, The big one, or the even bigger one.
rhymer
post Jul 22, 2007, 10:45 AM
Post #1


Supreme God
*******

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2093
Joined: Feb 27, 2003
Member No.: 385



See the construct here...

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa...EAAFAF2776CEFC5
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jul 23, 2007, 11:29 AM
Post #2


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



I prefer the smaller countable one. It's big enough for me.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
trojan_libido
post Jul 24, 2007, 11:20 AM
Post #3


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sep 19, 2006
From: UK
Member No.: 5681



Infinities larger than other infinities? I understand the logic they've used, but come on, we're simply updating our view and our language. The infinite is endless, trying to divide it up and pair it off with another line of infinite thought is crazy.

Its similar to the Universe/Multiverse idea. We've defined the universe as everything, then decided its not. Silly, we should simply divide the universe, not expand it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Jul 24, 2007, 02:38 PM
Post #4


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(trojan_libido @ Jul 24, 2007, 08:20 PM) *
Silly, we should simply divide the universe, not expand it.
If you were Lindsay, you'd give it another name! laugh.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jul 24, 2007, 03:10 PM
Post #5


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



To unlimitedness, and beyond!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
khenwood
post Jul 25, 2007, 07:05 AM
Post #6


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Jun 07, 2007
From: Washington DC
Member No.: 11800



Can we make up our own infinities?

I would like to introduce the K Henwood infinity!
Granted it's much smaller in scale than the standard infinity, but interesting nonetheless!

biggrin.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jul 25, 2007, 09:54 AM
Post #7


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



I hereby define the KH infinity (KHi) to be equal to 10 to the 50th power (10^50). We can define division by zero to be equal to KHi.

10^50 is larger than any number that has practical application in science or engineering, and division by that (10^-50) is so small as to be zero for all practical purposes.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Jul 25, 2007, 02:06 PM
Post #8


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Rick @ Jul 25, 2007, 06:54 PM) *
... so small as to be zero for all practical purposes.
Includes the planet Earth and humans. But one beat of the wings of a butterfly ...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jul 25, 2007, 02:52 PM
Post #9


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



Butterfly effects are not computable, so no need to consider them.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Jul 25, 2007, 03:12 PM
Post #10


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Rick @ Jul 25, 2007, 11:52 PM) *
Butterfly effects are not computable, so no need to consider them.
Neither is the weather - just look at the forecasts over 2 days in advance - but a lot of computing power is spent on that! I think weather forecasters must obtain their training and qualifications from the same source as astrologers. In this case PhD means Potluck has Dominated!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
khenwood
post Jul 31, 2007, 09:02 AM
Post #11


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Jun 07, 2007
From: Washington DC
Member No.: 11800



QUOTE(Rick @ Jul 25, 2007, 01:54 PM) *

I hereby define the KH infinity (KHi) to be equal to 10 to the 50th power (10^50). We can define division by zero to be equal to KHi.

10^50 is larger than any number that has practical application in science or engineering, and division by that (10^-50) is so small as to be zero for all practical purposes.


Yes! My infinity now has definition!
We had to start somewhere, now didn't we?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thefield
post Sep 09, 2008, 06:42 AM
Post #12


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
Member No.: 24114



theyre just talking about cardinality of numbers. integers and real numbers have different classes of infinity.

basically there are an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1, so there must be a "larger" infinity for real numbers over the integers, who do not have any fractions
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Sep 09, 2008, 07:37 AM
Post #13


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



Actually, the infinity of rational numbers is the same order as the integers: they are both countably infinite. It's the irrationals that get you into the uncountably infinite regime.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Sep 09, 2008, 03:29 PM
Post #14


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



Adding infinity to infinity is bigger than infinity? (Hee Hee, Hey Hey!)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Sep 09, 2008, 03:38 PM
Post #15


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



Infinity is not a number and is therefore not subject to numerical operations like addition. So adding infinity to infinity is nonsensical.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zizius
post Sep 16, 2008, 11:39 AM
Post #16


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Jul 25, 2008
From: Wherever the wind takes me
Member No.: 26494



QUOTE(Rick @ Sep 09, 2008, 03:38 PM) *

Infinity is not a number and is therefore not subject to numerical operations like addition. So adding infinity to infinity is nonsensical.

(lol)True story Rick. I don't know much math wise, but my interest has grown recently...Well, there's my 2 cents for now. biggrin.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
YinYang
post Apr 04, 2009, 07:46 AM
Post #17


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Jan 13, 2009
Member No.: 31853



Interesting debate!
Well, I personally think that infinity Is not a number too,it's more similar to an equation,like this:
1+X=Y
This is the way to represent infinity that we usually use: we start from one, then we add one and we have two, after we add two and we have three, etc etc.
But every equation,in the end, is a representation of infinity, because if we have two or more unknown quantities,the solutino is the infinity.
But this isn't all. We can also suspect that infinity does't exist, because math is a product of human mind, and human mind is limited, in our minds we can have some numbers, but not all the possible numbers. What we can suspect is that the solution of an equation is not the infinity, but the indeterminate and unlimited.
We can imagine one person that starts to count from one for all this life, and before he dies he says to someone to continue counting for all this life from the ultimate number of the first man. The second man does the same, and the counting will be unlimited in the time. But human mind will never catch the number "infinity", so infinity doesn't exist, we only have unlimited numbers, not an infinity.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Apr 08, 2009, 11:39 AM
Post #18


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



You can stay on safer ground mathematically if you say "unbounded" in place of "infinity." For example, I can keep typing in this text entry box for as long as I want. It's unbounded. But I can't type forever, so I can never have an infinite amount of text here. It's just unbounded, not infinite.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Apr 08, 2009, 12:10 PM
Post #19


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Rick @ Sep 10, 2008, 12:38 AM) *

Infinity is not a number and is therefore not subject to numerical operations like addition. So adding infinity to infinity is nonsensical.
Here's me thinking you brought numbers into the discussion:
QUOTE(Rick @ Jul 25, 2007, 06:54 PM) *

I hereby define the KH infinity (KHi) to be equal to 10 to the 50th power (10^50). We can define division by zero to be equal to KHi.

10^50 is larger than any number that has practical application in science or engineering, and division by that (10^-50) is so small as to be zero for all practical purposes.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Apr 08, 2009, 12:14 PM
Post #20


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



Surely it all depends on the 'factor' we consider, whether numbers, distance, time, etc, and whether these 'factors' are actually meaningful or 'real' outside the human construct in which they play a part. So, I reckon that infinity is more to do with reality and as such is unlikely to be defined or understood anytime soon, if ever, ever being a human construct of course.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Apr 08, 2009, 02:18 PM
Post #21


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



As long as computers crash (and minds boggle) when attempting to divide by zero, we will have this discussion.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Apr 08, 2009, 02:28 PM
Post #22


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Rick @ Apr 08, 2009, 11:18 PM) *

As long as computers crash (and minds boggle) when attempting to divide by zero, we will have this discussion.
Then we could end the discussion now ... buy a Mac! wink.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Apr 10, 2009, 10:12 AM
Post #23


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



I hate to break it to you, but even Macs will crash if they try to divide by zero!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Apr 10, 2009, 05:55 PM
Post #24


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Rick @ Apr 10, 2009, 07:12 PM) *

I hate to break it to you, but even Macs will crash if they try to divide by zero!
That's why they have error catching programming, n'est pa? And the Mac OS is better written, based on UNIX, but with an enhanced usability front end. smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Apr 12, 2009, 10:13 AM
Post #25


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



Implementation of error trapping and other defensive programming techniques depends on the programmer's competence, not the computer.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Apr 12, 2009, 02:24 PM
Post #26


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Rick @ Apr 12, 2009, 07:13 PM) *

Implementation of error trapping and other defensive programming techniques depends on the programmer's competence, not the computer.
Fair enough. Though computers are often involved in sophisticated programming - but that is a different point.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
correlli
post Apr 17, 2009, 07:01 AM
Post #27


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 84
Joined: Apr 12, 2009
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 32044



When the universe dies, so does infinity.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Apr 17, 2009, 09:04 AM
Post #28


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4065
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



QUOTE(correlli @ Apr 17, 2009, 03:01 PM) *

When the universe dies, so does infinity.

But that really doesn't ever happen.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
correlli
post Apr 17, 2009, 01:35 PM
Post #29


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 84
Joined: Apr 12, 2009
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 32044



QUOTE(Joesus @ Apr 17, 2009, 09:04 AM) *

QUOTE(correlli @ Apr 17, 2009, 03:01 PM) *

When the universe dies, so does infinity.

But that really doesn't ever happen.


OK, when I die, infinity will cease to exist. You can't really walk up to me after I've died, and convince me that the counter is still ticking over.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Apr 17, 2009, 03:56 PM
Post #30


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(correlli @ Apr 17, 2009, 10:35 PM) *

QUOTE(Joesus @ Apr 17, 2009, 09:04 AM) *

QUOTE(correlli @ Apr 17, 2009, 03:01 PM) *

When the universe dies, so does infinity.

But that really doesn't ever happen.


OK, when I die, infinity will cease to exist. You can't really walk up to me after I've died, and convince me that the counter is still ticking over.
As when you are asleep or under anesthetic. But then you wake up and we can again. So what was your point?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st September 2017 - 01:00 PM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

Consciousness Expansion · Brain Mapping · Neural Circuits · Connectomics  ·  Neuroscience Forum  ·  Brain Maps Blog
 · Connectomics · Connectomics  ·  shawn mikula  ·  shawn mikula  ·  articles