If the universe is infinite, does that mean that everything exists somewhere?

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of infinity and whether it means that all possibilities exist in the universe. While the universe may be infinite, it does not necessarily mean that all possibilities are realized. However, some theories, such as quantum mechanics, suggest that all possibilities must be realized. The conversation also touches on the idea of parallel universes and the existence of anti-particles. Overall, there is no consensus on the nature of the universe and its boundaries.
  • #141
Chalnoth, I sympathise with your views also. In fact I find I can move between Atheism, Agnosticism and Pantheism, sometimes all on the same day. Perhaps in his statement Einstein was helping by leading people from the old superstition anthropomorphic based religions into a higher state of enlightment, taking baby steps so to speak. Hopefully we will avoid the fate that Sagan was so concerned about. The main reason I have for sometimes believing in something greater is that it sometimes appears to me that there was a very powerful and intentional force behind the creation of the universe. It can't be proven, but the universe seems so finely tuned, too much so for random chance. The whole thing seems so unlikely, and instead we could have had a universe consisting of nothing more than an infinite amount of green jelly!

In the Anthony Hopkins interview, a fellow Welshman, I particularly agreed with his views regarding people "who know the truth". Such certainties gave rise to people like Hitler with plans for everyone. I have come to similar conclusions myself.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #142
Sage Lee said:
For me, the biggest surprise was that an empty set has a cardinality of 1. (Did I say this right?) This just pissed me off, and got me reading about vacuous truth, and it wasn't long before I threw my hands up in exasperation and stopped trying to understand why.

But because of my frustration, I didn't like the joke "in a set of zero mathematicians, anyone of them can do it [change a light bulb]." I actually remarked, to no one in particular, that "in a set of zero mathematicians, three of them are actually tomatoes." I liked this better because, "Hey, if we're being ridiculous, let's just let it all hang out and be ridiculous." What can I say, I was annoyed and was on that previously described tomato kick at the time.

But whatever, I accept on faith alone that an empty set is actually "one," because Wikipedia told me so... but I don't have to like it.

But all in all, I really, really like Set Theory, because as I said, with it, it seems possible to describe just about anything at all using math.


Congratulations, to both you and Chalnoth. I now completely agree with that statement. Gold star for youse guys. Although I'm thinking, as I said before, that I never really disagreed, I just didn't understand what infinity actually meant (I thought it literally meant "exhaustive.")

Hi Sage,
Sorry for resurrecting this older thread, but I happened to be re-reading through it for another reason, and had previously missed a statement you made, in error, that may cause all sorts of confusion if left uncorrected. The Cardinality of the Empty Set (Null Set) is not one, it is zero. The Set that contains the Empty Set is equal in Cardinality to one. In fact, in axiomatic Set Theory (e.g. ZFC), the existence of the Empty Set is defined as fundamental Axiom. It is upon this, and the following Pair Set and Sum Set axioms that larger Sets are created...thusly:

{ }= ø = 0
{{ }} = {ø} = 1
{{{ }}} = {ø,{ø}} = {0,1} = 2
{{{{ }}}} = {ø,{ø},{ø,{ø}}} = {0,1,2} = 3
etc., etc.
 
  • #143
I read some answers that tended to argue that the possibility that everything could exist was unlikely. Other comments gave the impression that having a twin in another world sounded like sci-fi... Maybe you should spend some times reading what Max Tengmark has to say about the Multiverse http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/PDF/multiverse_sciam.pdf. Also find out more here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#Level_I:_Beyond_our_cosmological_horizon.

The argument Tengmark makes is that worlds similar to ours are very likely, that is the likelihood that you have a twin somewhere in another world is high. Those un-observable universes , those of level-I, that is worlds beyond our cosmological horizon, will probably be of an infinite number. They will all have the same physical laws and constants as ours. Everything that is possible in our world will be possible in those worlds. In that sense, everyhing that could happen here, even if it will never happen here or has never happened here, would probably have happened or will probably happen somewhere in a Level-I un-observable world. In conclusion, it is highly probable that you have a twin somewhere, dating J-Lo's twin in that world...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #144
Tanelorn said:
Albert Einstein named Spinoza as the philosopher who exerted the most influence on his world view (Weltanschauung). Spinoza equated God (infinite substance) with Nature, consistent with Einstein's belief in an impersonal deity. interesting comment.

By impersonal do we mean "unconscious"? Because, Spinoza God also possesses the Attribute of being infinitely conscious. I am not to sure what being infinitely conscious means, but I pretty sure it's not the same thing as "unconscious". Am I confusing things here?
 
  • #145
nakian, welcome to PF!

Also I thank you for the multiverse links and question about Spinoza.

These subjects are very interesting to me, however they are also highly speculative so we may need to discuss them elsewhere. This Cosmology forum is meant for questions on the hard science of the standard model, but the thread seems to have survived thus far.

This paper on Spinoza is interesting. On pages 23 and 24 there is discussion on Spinoza's view of conciousness:
http://philosophy.fas.nyu.edu/docs/IO/2575/garrett.pdf

I presume you also enjoy the works of Nakian?
 
Last edited:
  • #146
nakian said:
By impersonal do we mean "unconscious"? Because, Spinoza God also possesses the Attribute of being infinitely conscious. I am not to sure what being infinitely conscious means, but I pretty sure it's not the same thing as "unconscious". Am I confusing things here?

By "impersonal deity" Einstein could be meaning one or more of the following.

1. not personal; without reference or connection to a particular person: an impersonal remark.
2. having no personality; devoid of human character or traits: an impersonal deity.
3. lacking human emotion or warmth: an impersonal manner.

I agree though that Spinoza's God is infinitely conscious, whereas Einstein seems to be saying that his God is devoid of human character, traits and personality.

More recently some may have also relegated God further, to a God of nature, an unconscious force of creation. Lovelock's Gaia principle may also be related to this view of God. ie. A Gaiaverse.
 
Last edited:
<h2>1. What is the concept of an infinite universe?</h2><p>An infinite universe is a theoretical concept in which the universe has no boundaries or limits. It suggests that the universe is constantly expanding and has no definite end or edge.</p><h2>2. Does an infinite universe imply the existence of multiple copies of ourselves?</h2><p>The concept of an infinite universe does not necessarily mean that there are multiple copies of ourselves. While it is possible that there could be other versions of ourselves in different parts of the universe, there is no scientific evidence to support this idea.</p><h2>3. If the universe is infinite, does that mean there are an infinite number of planets and galaxies?</h2><p>Yes, if the universe is truly infinite, then there would be an infinite number of planets and galaxies. However, it is important to note that the observable universe, which is the part of the universe that we can see and study, is not infinite.</p><h2>4. Is it possible for there to be an infinite number of universes?</h2><p>While there are theories that suggest the existence of multiple universes, known as the multiverse theory, there is currently no scientific evidence to support the idea of an infinite number of universes.</p><h2>5. How does the concept of an infinite universe affect our understanding of time and space?</h2><p>An infinite universe challenges our traditional understanding of time and space. It suggests that the universe has always existed and will continue to exist forever, making the concept of a beginning or end of the universe irrelevant. It also raises questions about the shape and structure of the universe, as well as the possibility of parallel universes.</p>

1. What is the concept of an infinite universe?

An infinite universe is a theoretical concept in which the universe has no boundaries or limits. It suggests that the universe is constantly expanding and has no definite end or edge.

2. Does an infinite universe imply the existence of multiple copies of ourselves?

The concept of an infinite universe does not necessarily mean that there are multiple copies of ourselves. While it is possible that there could be other versions of ourselves in different parts of the universe, there is no scientific evidence to support this idea.

3. If the universe is infinite, does that mean there are an infinite number of planets and galaxies?

Yes, if the universe is truly infinite, then there would be an infinite number of planets and galaxies. However, it is important to note that the observable universe, which is the part of the universe that we can see and study, is not infinite.

4. Is it possible for there to be an infinite number of universes?

While there are theories that suggest the existence of multiple universes, known as the multiverse theory, there is currently no scientific evidence to support the idea of an infinite number of universes.

5. How does the concept of an infinite universe affect our understanding of time and space?

An infinite universe challenges our traditional understanding of time and space. It suggests that the universe has always existed and will continue to exist forever, making the concept of a beginning or end of the universe irrelevant. It also raises questions about the shape and structure of the universe, as well as the possibility of parallel universes.

Similar threads

  • Cosmology
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
27
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
920
Replies
25
Views
1K
Replies
55
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
926
  • Cosmology
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
3
Views
3K
Back
Top