B Does it make sense to say that something is almost infinite?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter SSG-E
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinite
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the concept of "almost infinite," which many participants argue lacks formal mathematical meaning, as something is either finite or infinite. The term is often used informally to describe very large numbers that are impractical to express. In the context of ordinal numbers, the first infinite ordinal, denoted as ω, is identified as a limit ordinal with no predecessor. Some participants suggest that the phrase "almost infinite" could be likened to intuitive explanations in videos, where rigorous definitions are not the focus. Ultimately, the consensus is that while "almost infinite" may convey a sense of vastness, it does not hold a precise mathematical definition.
SSG-E
Messages
60
Reaction score
12
TL;DR Summary
Does it make sense to say that something is almost infinite? If yes, then why?
I remember hearing someone say "almost infinite" in this video. As someone who hasn't studied very much math, "almost infinite" sounds like nonsense. Either something ends or it doesn't, there really isn't a spectrum of unending-ness. In this video he says that ''almost infinite'' pieces of verticle lines are placed along X length. Why not infinit?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
No I'm not aware of any sense in which 'almost infinite' makes formal sense. In practise, I guess it means "a very large number".

From a context of ordinal numbers, the first infinite ordinal ##\omega## has no predecessor, that is there is no ordinal ##\eta## such that ##\omega = \eta +1##. One says that ##\omega## is a limit ordinal.
 
  • Like
Likes Adesh and etotheipi
Math_QED said:
No I'm not aware of any sense in which 'almost infinite' makes sense.

From a context of ordinal numbers, the first infinite ordinal ##\omega## has no predecessor, that is there is no ordinal ##\eta## such that ##\omega = \eta +1##. One says that ##\omega## is a limit ordinal.
Then is it correct to say infinite pieces instead of almost infinite pieces in that video?
 
SSG-E said:
Then is it correct to say infinite pieces instead of almost infinite pieces in that video?

I did not say something like that. This video tries to intuitively explain what dimension is. You shouldn't be looking for rigorous explanations in videos like that, but just to get a 'feeling' for the subject.

Infinite dimensional just means NOT finite dimensional (in the context of vector spaces at least).
 
Math_QED said:
I did not say something like that. This video tries to intuitively explain what dimension is. You shouldn't be looking for rigorous explanations in videos like that, but just to get a 'feeling' for the subject.

Infinite dimensional just means NOT finite dimensional (in the context of vector spaces at least).
I don't get it
 
Things are either finite or infinite. There is no formal definition for almost infinite. Informally as @Math_QED said it means a really large number likely a number you can't write down in a reasonable amount of time.

Some famous cases of numbers are:

  • googol =
    10^{{100}}.
  • centillion =
    10^{303}
    or
    10^{600}
    , depending on number naming system.
  • millillion =
    {\displaystyle 10^{3003}}
    or
    {\displaystyle 10^{6000}}
    , depending on number naming system.
  • micrillion =
    {\displaystyle 10^{3000003}}
    or
    {\displaystyle 10^{6000000}}
    , depending on number naming system.
  • The largest known Smith number = (101031−1) × (104594 + 3×102297 + 1)1476 ×103913210.
  • The largest known Mersenne prime =
    {\displaystyle 2^{82,589,933}-1}
    (as of December 21, 2018),
  • googolplex =
    10^{\text{googol}}=10^{10^{100}}
    .
  • Skewes' numbers: the first is approximately
    10^{10^{10^{34}}}
    , the second
    10^{10^{10^{964}}}
    ,
  • googolplexian =
    {\displaystyle 10^{\text{googolplex}}=10^{10^{\text{googol}}}=10^{10^{10^{100}}}}
    .
  • Graham's number, larger than what can be represented even using power towers (tetration). However, it can be represented using Knuth's up-arrow notation.
  • Rayo's number is a large number named after Agustín Rayo which has been claimed to be the largest named number. It was originally defined in a "big number duel" at MIT on 26 January 2007.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_numbers

It's like games of chance where people like to say they almost won. They either won or they lost there is nothing in between. You either won the money or lost the money but almost won sounds better especially when talking to your spouse.
 
  • Like
Likes Adesh, etotheipi, SSG-E and 1 other person
One could come up with a topological notion of "almost infinite". Consider, for instance the real number line compactified into a circle by adjoining a point at +/- infinity. Impose a topology on this circle by considering that the distance (metric) between a point x and infinity is given by ##\frac{1}{\text{max}(1,|x|)}##

[I suspect one might have to juice up this metric a bit to make sure it obeys the triangle inequality. The easy way is to use the induced metric from the circle. Now all you have to do is map real values plus infinity to a circle -- something like arc-tangent]

Now you have a notion of "almost infinite" -- 1,000,000 is only 1/1,000,000 away from infinity.
 
  • Informative
Likes etotheipi
jbriggs444 said:
Consider, for instance the real number line compactified into a circle by adjoining a point at +/- infinity
Or even map all complex numbers onto a sphere (the Riemann sphere):
1591811906765.png
 
  • Like
Likes sysprog and etotheipi

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
16K
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Back
Top