No Beginning? How Did We Ever Arrive Here Then?

[ERayR]

It is of interest to know the size of things like the universe. The problem is however that if it is possible that the universe does go on forever we will nor cannot ever know it. We could continue to measure space and count things within that space and even do this task endlessly into the future but we will never approach the point of knowing it in its entirety because that does not exist.

 

And one could get a very long way from home.

[Zeta-Flux]

Its not hard to prove even with mathematics that you cannot compare the size or numerical value of two different sets of infinities. It doesnt exist. There is no such thing as an infinte set of something smaller or larger than another infinte set of somethings.

This is incorrect.  One way to measure infinite sets is via cardinality.  Under this measure, some infinite sets are bigger than others.  [Yes, this blows my students minds when I teach it to them.]

[Zeta-Flux]

Everything we measure or place numerical value on is always done within a finite set of value. Thats my point. When you try to apply this same measurement against anything infinite in theory it becomes useless because a finite value means nothing if comparing it to something that is neverending. It reminds me of the stupid Dilbert Hotel Paradox where you have a hotel with an infinite set of rooms but all become full and then someone else shows up and so you just switch occupant #1 to room #2 to make room and so on forever. The stupid thing here is that it breaks its own principle of logic because there is no such thing as something of infinite space being made full. Thats like saying a finite number of things can fill an endless amount of space. The stupid paradox is only a paradox to the dumb and blind for not understanding basic logic.

Hmmm... that is a lot of "stupids" and "dumbs" in that post of yours.  Please tone it down.

 

The Hilbert (not Dilbert) Hotel Paradox is not stupid, but an extremely useful example of how to create a bijection from a proper subset of the natural numbers to the entire set of natural numbers.

 

Of course the thought experiment has its limits (pun intended), but the logic of the example is soundly modeled by the infinite set {1,2,3,...}.

Edited July 21, 2014 by Zeta-Flux

[ERayR]

This is incorrect.  One way to measure infinite sets is via cardinality.  Under this measure, some infinite sets are bigger than others.  [Yes, this blows my students minds when I teach it to them.]

 

Only if one redefines some words or suspends reason and common sense.  Once you set a boundary it is no longer infinite.

 

By definition:  (bolding mine)

in·fi·nite

ˈinfənit/

adjective

adjective: infinite

1.

limitless or endless in space, extent, or size; impossible to measure or calculate.

"the infinite mercy of God"

synonyms: boundless, unbounded, unlimited, limitless, never-ending, interminable; Edited July 21, 2014 by ERayR

[Rob Osborn]

This is incorrect.  One way to measure infinite sets is via cardinality.  Under this measure, some infinite sets are bigger than others.  [Yes, this blows my students minds when I teach it to them.]

Complete BS I say. There is no such thing as one infinte set bigger in numerical value than onther infinite set.

[Rob Osborn]

Hmmm... that is a lot of "stupids" and "dumbs" in that post of yours.  Please tone it down.

 

The Hilbert (not Dilbert) Hotel Paradox is not stupid, but an extremely useful example of how to create a bijection from a proper subset of the natural numbers to the entire set of natural numbers.

 

Of course the thought experiment has its limits (pun intended), but the logic of the example is soundly modeled by the infinite set {1,2,3,...}.

The pradox of the infinte hotel makes no logical or mathematical sense. Its useless other than a gimick to catch the less intelligent unawares.

[Rob Osborn]

Consider having some way to know and keep track of everything you have ever done since the moment you were born as a child of our Father in heaven, along with everything you will do from the present into the future, and then you will have some idea of how our Father can know how many planets he has created and how many children he has and everything else that he knows, while also knowing that he never had an ultimate beginning because he was a part of his parents and what they did before he was born.

Yes, but just so we are on the same page- there isnt no point where God has an infinite amount of memories that regress into the past or the future.

[mfbukowski]

So we know from the scriptures that matter and intelligence had no beginning. We've always existed albeit in a different form than we do now. So the question is how did we ever arrive here? If we've "always" existed then that means we've "always" been traveling toward where we are now. If you are always traveling toward something then you are never arriving.

 

It's like that problem of moving toward the wall half way each time. If you are always moving toward the wall but you only go half the distance each time will you ever hit the wall? The answer is no...you won't. You can't ever hit it if you only go half way each time. Likewise, an entity with no beginning cannot say that "someday" he'll be organized into something different because someday cannot exist if you are always only heading toward that.

 

Thoughts?

I got halfway through your post but couldn't finish it.

 

I think the fact that you DID finish it shows there is a problem in the thesis to start with.

 

Old stuff.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes

Edited July 21, 2014 by mfbukowski

[Ahab]

Yes, but just so we are on the same page- there isnt no point where God has an infinite amount of memories that regress into the past or the future.

Just so we are on the same page, please say that again but without the double negatives.

[Rob Osborn]

Just so we are on the same page, please say that again but without the double negatives.

Plain and simply- God does not contain or comprehend an infinite amount of memories.

[MormonFreeThinker]

One might rephrase the question like this:  "Seriously, why do people care about what Dehlin MormonFreeThinker thinks, and why do people want to know if Sandra joined mormonstories". 

 

Why you gotta be so rude? Don't you know I'm human too? Why you gotta be so rude? I am going to 

 

I see nobody starting topics about me, and talking about what I say. 

[MormonFreeThinker]

 

I have taught a number of math classes on the university level, including calculus and differential equations. 

 

… This is getting ridiculous.  Believe whatever you want. 

 

 

So you should know more Calculus than me, you are a professor. 

Please tell me, how do you reach infinity? When will you reach infinity?  

If you add 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 ... to infinity, the series converges to 1, but you need to add an infinite number of fractions for the series to converge to 1, when will you reach an infinite amount of fractions? 

Please explain professor, I will be extremely glad if you have an explanation, I really do want an answer. 

 

[ERayR]

Why you gotta be so rude? Don't you know I'm human too? Why you gotta be so rude? I am going to 

 

I see nobody starting topics about me, and talking about what I say. 

 

Why do you have to be so elitist.  Just because you don't want to talk about it does not mean someone else doesn't.  Its just that your elitist attitude ruffles my egalitarian sensibilities.

[thesometimesaint]

It is of interest to know the size of things like the universe. The problem is however that if it is possible that the universe does go on forever we will nor cannot ever know it. We could continue to measure space and count things within that space and even do this task endlessly into the future but we will never approach the point of knowing it in its entirety because that does not exist. What we can only ever know is that we are a part of something that appears to be never ending. I like to give the analogy of memories because its something we can relate to. We will go on forever but at no point will we have an infinite amount of memories. If we were to thus then apply individual memories to places we know in the universe we would find out the stark reality of the problem- there never comes a point at anytime in the future where we would have a memory or place in our minds for an infinite number of places (an infinite knowable universe). Thus we can see that all we can ever know (stored as knowledge/memories) is only of that which is of finite value. This is why in the scriptures God speaks of have an inumerable amount of things from our perspective but from his he knows all of them and he can count them. The valued lesson here is that even for God all that he knows is numbered and continue to increase in number all the time but never is there a point where he knows an infinite number of things. They are inumerable to us because we have not the technology to see and count them. Our telescopes are not powerful enough neither are our microscopes powerful enough to see even the tiniest of subatomic particles. Thus, in our mortal frames they must be inumerable but for God they are all countable.

Infinity is a way of just saying something is endless. The moment we try to place value or measurements within that paradigm it all becomes rather useless.

 

Something can be priceless(of infinitely large worth)  and another thing can be worthless(of infinitely small worth) neither is absolutely true, but still very useful.

[Ahab]

Plain and simply- God does not contain or comprehend an infinite amount of memories.

If by God you're referring to our Father I agree because he knows and remembers everything which means there must be a limit.

If by God you're referring to each person who is God, or the same kind of being which we refer to as God, then since there are and will continue to be an infinite number of us with each of us knowing all that we know then there are an infinite number of memories corresponding to each one of us and therefore there are an infinite number of memories.

So, plain and simple, our knowledge and memories are infinite with some of us knowing and remembering everything there is to know and remember.

[Ahab]

Plain and simply- God does not contain or comprehend an infinite amount of memories.

If by God you're referring to our Father I agree because he knows and remembers everything which means there must be a limit.

If by God you're referring to each person who is God, or the same kind of being which we refer to as God, then since there are and will continue to be an infinite number of us with each of us knowing all that we know then there are an infinite number of memories corresponding to each one of us and therefore there are an infinite number of memories.

So, plain and simple, our knowledge and memories are infinite with some of us knowing and remembering everything there is to know and remember.

[Ahab]

Plain and simply- God does not contain or comprehend an infinite amount of memories.

If by God you're referring to our Father I agree because he knows and remembers everything which means there must be a limit.

If by God you're referring to each person who is God, or the same kind of being which we refer to as God, then since there are and will continue to be an infinite number of us with each of us knowing all that we know then there are an infinite number of memories corresponding to each one of us and therefore there are an infinite number of memories.

So, plain and simple, our knowledge and memories are infinite with some of us knowing and remembering everything there is to know and remember.

[Zeta-Flux]

 

Only if one redefines some words or suspends reason and common sense.  Once you set a boundary it is no longer infinite.

 

By definition:  (bolding mine)

in·fi·nite

ˈinfənit/

adjective

adjective: infinite

1.

limitless or endless in space, extent, or size; impossible to measure or calculate.

"the infinite mercy of God"

synonyms: boundless, unbounded, unlimited, limitless, never-ending, interminable;

 

ERayR,

 

Just a little thought experiment.

 

Are there an infinite number of points in a circle?  Can you measure it's length?

 

Just to let you know, I am a professor of mathematics at BYU.  I've spent a good part of my life working with infinite sets.

 

We measure infinite sets all the time.  Some infinite sets have lengths (like circles) and some do not (a straight line in Euclidean space).  There are even ways to measure the difference between sizes of infinite sets (such as I linked to above).

 

Now you are correct that the formal mathematical definition of "infinite" (which just means "not finite", or in bijection with a natural number) is different than the philosophical concept of "infinity" given in the dictionary you quoted above.  However, mathematical tools are an excellent resource for trying to understand the universe, which is where the idea of the infinite originates in the first place.  It makes a lot more sense to try to model our understanding of infinity and the universe using mathematics, rather than an abstract philosophical definition of the infinite which is ipso facto the only understanding of infinity we can use.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Zeta-Flux

[Zeta-Flux]

The pradox of the infinte hotel makes no logical or mathematical sense. Its useless other than a gimick to catch the less intelligent unawares.

 

A lot of professional mathematicians (including myself) disagree.  But I guess you are more qualified to declare what makes "no...mathematical sense".  

[Ahab]

A lot of professional mathematicians (including myself) disagree. But I guess you are more qualified to declare what makes "no...mathematical sense".

Yes, some people apparently don't realize that mathematical sense and philosophical sense don't always equate to the same thing, especially when mathematics uses things like unreal and imaginary numbers.

And just FYI, I imagine a circle to go round and round in the same space forever, which is how I visualize a wedding ring as a symbol of eternity.

[thesometimesaint]

Yes, some people apparently don't realize that mathematical sense and philosophical sense don't always equate to the same thing, especially when mathematics uses things like unreal and imaginary numbers.

And just FYI, I imagine a circle to go round and round in the same space forever, which is how I visualize a wedding ring as a symbol of eternity.

 

 Like Pi, and the square root of a negative number.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

So if eternity is like a circle or wedding ring, does that mean we are just in a really long extended version of "Groundhog Day"?

[thesometimesaint]

So if eternity is like a circle or wedding ring, does that mean we are just in a really long extended version of "Groundhog Day"?

 

No. History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

[Rob Osborn]

Hilberts Hotel paradox points out many falsehoods in discussing infinities. Lets begin. Realize I do not teach math for a living so my terms may nt be up to par with you.

Problem #1. Hilberts hotel supposedly has an infinite amount of rooms but they are all full. The rooms occupy space. With this logic in place it is safe to say that the amount of space they occupy is of an infinite value. It is "unlimited". There is no finite number that could ever occupy it in its fullness. In fact, there is no "fullness" property to it because it goes on forever. You could thus never take a thing like a person which also occupys space and fill this endless space up. It never gets full. It can never be full- its an oxymoron to say that something which has the property of unfillable to be filled. By stating that the hotel of infinite rooms is all full places a limit on the occupancy of the rooms. Here again is an oxymoron. Something that is without limits cannot be limited.

Problem #2. You have all these infinite other groups of people arrive at the hotel and using the same priinciple still fit them all until you start to do some tricky switching using Cantors argument which then places a disagreement with pairings one having more than the other. Cantors diagonal proof doesnt show that two infinites can be different in size. It just shows the stupidity of mans thinking In Cantors proof he supposedly creates a new number that wasnt originally in the list of infinite numbers. The problem with this is nothing more than the irrational thinking involved not following proper logic. It is impossible to create a new number in Cantors list because you have to account for every possible outcome in each column. In cantors argument all he is doing is taking a list of finite numbers we can see and creating a new number that just changes it one decimal place over and because his counting always shows ahead of the creation of the old number behind its justa gimmick that proves nothing more than how stupid man can be confused. The real proof lies in the fact that a true list of his numbers would include every possible outcome for each column of numbers to the right forever and ever. Thus, no new number he could create could ever truly be unaccounted for because all of the infinite possibilities are already accounted for for every column. Applying this back to the hotel with an infinite number of people arriving we have to ask this- Lets say that the guests had to arrive one by one so that we could count them. At what point do we fill the hotel? It never happens! It never even approaches any point being closer to zero or infinity because when you add like this you cannot pair up somethig of endless count with something you can count. In this scenerio, no matter how fast they come, you never fill the hotel. You never even approach its capacity it being a point that is unlimited. Its thus more logical to say that it can fit an unlimited amount of guests/ it could always accomidate every endless soul and still have an endless capacity to fit more.

Measuring infinities is thus futile because there is no such thing as pairing up or comparing that which numbers are without end.

[thesometimesaint]

There is an infinite set of numbers within an infinite set. IE; The set of numbers between 0-1, and the set of numbers greater than 1.