Integrity of matter / space and time

[tuneksan]

I have probably a basic question from Space, Time and Matter area.

My 11 years old daughter asked me once why we exist physically in a stable form if everything is infinite. We had a conversation about it but then it got me thinking about this and it seems I can't find the answer.

There is time, matter and numbers. So, it is pretty obvious that time and unit of time is infinite in its complexity as we can keep on dividing 1sec into infinity and we will never reach the end. The same with Numbers. And the same with matter, we can "zoom" in indefinitely - like with a simple line on a paper for example.

If that is the case, then every matter that we see should not exist simply because it is never fully created. All is being constantly computed into infinity and the process can't be stopped. So all should collapse as it is never created to a stable form.

The only possible solution for me is if matter is information or data like numbers. Then it would mean it is sort of simulated only to an extent of what consciousness could observe at a given moment. If one needs more insight / zoom or division then that is being "manifested" from the pre-defined data algorithm.

But that sounds kinda crazy.

I'm an average person when it comes to physics education but I work with financial numbers and data presentation and I'm an artist too - so I have an overwhelming imagination. So could you point me to any book that could explain it, so that I can also explain it to my daughter? Or any theory, or what you think of it.

Thank you!

 

[Drakkith]

There is time, matter and numbers. So, it is pretty obvious that time and unit of time is infinite in its complexity as we can keep on dividing 1sec into infinity and we will never reach the end.

I'd argue that this isn't complexity. It's just simple subdivision of something into smaller and smaller parts.

The same with Numbers.

Numbers and math are arguably manmade constructs. Just like the rules of football.

And the same with matter, we can "zoom" in indefinitely - like with a simple line on a paper for example.

You can 'zoom' in forever, sure, but matter has a minimum 'size'. Zoom in far enough on that line and you can see individual atoms. Zoom in further and you get subatomic particles. But further than that and you don't see anything new as far as we know.

If that is the case, then every matter that we see should not exist simply because it is never fully created.

This is a non sequitur. Your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise.

All is being constantly computed into infinity and the process can't be stopped. So all should collapse as it is never created to a stable form.

There is no computation happening.

So could you point me to any book that could explain it, so that I can also explain it to my daughter? Or any theory, or what you think of it.

There are no mainstream theories that explain why we exist at all. It's a fundamental fact, a building block that we simply have to accept without explanation. We exist, and from there we can start to look at the universe we exist in and discover how it works.

 

[Dale]

If that is the case, then every matter that we see should not exist simply because it is never fully created.

This if-then statement doesn’t make any sense. A continuum in no way implies non-existence nor incomplete creation.

So all should collapse as it is never created to a stable form.

Stability is also unrelated to all of the previous concepts: continuum, existence, and creation.

So could you point me to any book that could explain it, so that I can also explain it to my daughter?

Stability has to do with a potential energy that has a minimum. If a system has some potential energy, and if that system can exchange energy with its surroundings, then that system will tend to lose energy until it gets to the minimum. Once at the minimum, small perturbations will still keep the system near the minimum. Staying near that minimum is the meaning of stability.

It has nothing to do with continuity or infinite zoooming or the rest.

 

[phinds]

@tuneskan, it's really great that you want to help your daughter with learning science, so I recommend that you read some basic science yourself so you can be more help to her. As should be clear from the answers already given, you have some misconceptions. Not to worry, we all start out like that. I suspect you'll find it very enjoyable to learn some science and being able to help her learn.

 

[tuneksan]

Thank you all for your answers. I’ve dig into the topic and i think that the best answer for my problem would be the uncertainty principle from the world of quantum mechanics… though it is only a theory so all is possible… :(

When it comes to dividing time or matter into smaller and smaller parts it is possible but there is a practical and technological constrain where at extremely small scales around Plank time our current understanding of physics breaks down and it is uncertain whether matter or time can be meaningfully divided any further. We just don’t know… so I also think that my issue is around theoretical physics rather than general physics.

I think it is like with virtual worlds - when you play a game you see the 3d world and you are unable to understand how it is constructed looking only from that world perspective - no matter how much you look into the details - you will hit the theory realm at certain scale - you will never see or understand the game world is on a chip in a PC. But from our perspective it is simple - all is a code and information processed and created based on a certian code principles.

Could be the same with how we observe our real world - we just don’t have the right perspective to get to bottom of it.

 

[PeroK]

Could be the same with how we observe our real world - we just don’t have the right perspective to get to bottom of it.

Unless you've put in the years of study to get the limit of our current understanding, then it's an easy option to sit in your armchair and pontificate that physicists are doing it all wrong.

 

[tuneksan]

Unless you've put in the years of study to get the limit of our current understanding, then it's an easy option to sit in your armchair and pontificate that physicists are doing it all wrong.

Oh dear, that wasn’t my intention at all! We’re not doing anything wrong.. it is actually the opposite because we are moving forward and constantly discovering... :) What im saying is that we will always hit that boundary of limitations and will be stuck for some time… that’s the point where theoretical physics and theories thrive - until we move another step and verify…

But really imagine what i wrote - if you are in a virtual world you will never see the processor or RAM or SD drive and all the elements that build that world - coz in One way or other it is a different dimension, the place where virtual mix with physical is the information and interpretation of that information which creates that virtual world.

So saying that our perspective is not right - im only saying that we don‘t have option to discover more faster or even ultimately reach the line where we comprehend everything

 

[Dale]

i think that the best answer for my problem would be the uncertainty principle

What does the uncertainty principle have to do with the stability of matter? It is involved in some unstable matter, but as far as I know it never makes matter stable.

 

[PeroK]

Oh dear, that wasn’t my intention at all! We’re not doing anything wrong.. it is actually the opposite because we are moving forward and constantly discovering... :) What im saying is that we will always hit that boundary of limitations and will be stuck for some time… that’s the point where theoretical physics and theories thrive - until we move another step and verify…

But really imagine what i wrote - if you are in a virtual world you will never see the processor or RAM or SD drive and all the elements that build that world - coz in One way or other it is a different dimension, the place where virtual mix with physical is the information and interpretation of that information which creates that virtual world.

So saying that our perspective is not right - im only saying that we don‘t have option to discover more faster or even ultimately reach the line where we comprehend everything

To be honest, I don't think I understand the point you're making.

 

[phinds]

i think that the best answer for my problem would be the uncertainty principle from the world of quantum mechanics

Wow. That one really came out of left field. Again, I urge you to study some physics, to help relieve you of your misconceptions.

 

[weirdoguy]

though it is only a theory so all is possible… :(

Word "theory" in science usually means something different (almost opposite) than in everyday life. Gravity is also a theory, but not all is possible.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Numbers and math are arguably manmade constructs.

HAha. A lot of arguing is involved in that one!

 

[Mister T]

though it is only a theory

Is there any physics that you think is not a theory or at least part of a theory?

 

[cyboman]

Oh dear, that wasn’t my intention at all! We’re not doing anything wrong.. it is actually the opposite because we are moving forward and constantly discovering... :) What im saying is that we will always hit that boundary of limitations and will be stuck for some time… that’s the point where theoretical physics and theories thrive - until we move another step and verify…

But really imagine what i wrote - if you are in a virtual world you will never see the processor or RAM or SD drive and all the elements that build that world - coz in One way or other it is a different dimension, the place where virtual mix with physical is the information and interpretation of that information which creates that virtual world.

So saying that our perspective is not right - im only saying that we don‘t have option to discover more faster or even ultimately reach the line where we comprehend everything

I think what you're positing is that there is more to discover. I don't think any scientist would disagree. You also seem to be suggesting that sci-fi hypothesis that we are all in a simulation of sorts. These are interesting and compelling ideas to ruminate. The more time you can invest in exploring physics and astrophysics, the better prepared you are to engage in satisfying these intellectual curiosities. It doesn't mean you can't have fun imagining new theories.

For the young mind to prepare to engage with these complex ideas, humility and discipline are important skills when studying such esoteric material. And in providing a model, humility can take the form of you saying, "I have no idea the answer to that question. But let's see where we can look to get closer to an answer. Or closer to a better question."

It's ok to imagine and that's beautiful. But it's also important to instill a notion of discipline and effort required for understanding these complex questions. My advice would be to spur and nurture her curiosity with an air of humility. That can be challenging as a father figure, but I think it's the way to go. Otherwise, it's pretending to understand things you don't.

Have fun and laugh along the way!