Is Infinity Just a Mathematical Concept or Does It Exist in Reality?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of infinity, questioning whether it is merely a mathematical concept or if it has any real existence in the physical world. Participants explore various interpretations of infinity, its implications in mathematics, and potential analogues in reality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that infinity is primarily a mathematical concept, with no direct analogue in reality.
  • Others propose that different contexts define infinity in various ways, such as in the case of limits or cardinality in set theory.
  • One participant suggests that the concept of infinity could be better understood as "boundless" or "limitless," emphasizing its contextual nature.
  • There are claims that certain scenarios, like an exploding car in a race, can illustrate how infinity might be perceived in real-world situations.
  • Some participants question the feasibility of having an infinite quantity of something in reality, using examples like infinite coins.
  • One participant mentions that in optics, parallel rays of light can be considered to be at infinity.
  • Another participant discusses the idea of a physical circle as a polygon with an infinite number of sides, raising questions about the existence of perfect circles.
  • There are references to philosophical implications of infinity, including discussions about time, space, and the concept of God as an infinite entity.
  • Some participants express skepticism about whether mathematics has successfully modeled real-world phenomena using the concept of infinity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether infinity exists in reality or is solely a mathematical construct. Multiple competing views are presented, with some emphasizing its mathematical nature and others exploring its potential real-world implications.

Contextual Notes

Discussions include various interpretations of infinity that depend on context, leading to ambiguity in definitions and applications. Some mathematical statements regarding infinity are noted as being context-dependent and potentially meaningless without proper definitions.

  • #61


vish_al210 said:
I have a question folks..
Even a random number becomes finite once we have generated it. though the possibility of what the number will be is infinite, the number by itself is finite as the bounds are finite.
I think you mean that there are an infinite number of possible numbers, not that a specific random number was "infinite" before it was generated.

Even in case of an ADC read of an AC analogous value, independently changing with time, the value measured at any static reference of time is finite, where as the possibility of what may be read is infinite.
So as the question posed in this thread, Is anything infinte? (In a static time reference frame, I guess not.) I mean once it occurs or is generated or penned down, the value the system takes is finite (could have been anything but once taken is finite)
Please clarify.
Hey, it was your idea! Only you can clarify it.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #62


vish_al210 said:
I have a question folks..
Even a random number becomes finite once we have generated it. though the possibility of what the number will be is infinite

...
You appear to be quite confused -- you are treating "the cardinality of the sample space* of a random variable" and "the magnitude of an outcome**" as if they were talking about the same thing.

As an analogy, it would be like holding a deck of cards and saying "this is 52", then withdrawing the five of diamonds and saying "52 changed to 5".



*: the sample space is, loosely speaking, the set of 'possibilities' of a random variable
**: loosely speaking, an outcome is one of your 'possibilities', assuming I understand you're meaning.
 
  • #63


If I remember my Calculus right: Suppose we have bored a hole with radius beginning at 1, and equal to 1/x the depth of the hole at that point. Then the total area of this hole is: \int_1^\infty\frac{2\pi dx}{x}, which is infinite.

But when it comes to the volume, we have \int_1^\infty\frac{\pi dx}{x^2} =\pi

So that this hole can not be painted, but it can be completely filled with paint!
 
Last edited:
  • #64


yuiop said:
In physics, the coordinate time for a object to fall to the event horizon of a Schwarzschild black hole is infinite, but the proper time recorded by a clock attached to the object is finite. In this case infinite can be transformed to finite. This points to the "many kinds of infinite" that George Cantor introduced us to. Some infinites are bigger than others. Some can be counted and others can not be counted even in principle.

This theoretical phenomenon has nothing to do with different infinite cardinalities!
 
Last edited:
  • #65


robert Ihnot said:
If I remember my Calculus right: Suppose we have bored a hole with radius beginning at 1, and equal to 1/x the depth of the hole at that point. Then the total area of this hole is: \int_1^\infty\frac{2\pi dx}{x}, which is infinite.

But when it comes to the volume, we have \int_1^\infty\frac{\pi dx}{x^2} =\pi

So that this hole can not be painted, but it can be completely filled with paint!

Interesting case. The same result also holds for a cylinder of radius r and length
1/ r ^ 2 if r approaches 0.
 
  • #66


M Grandin said:
Interesting case. The same result also holds for a cylinder of radius r and length
1/ r ^ 2 if r approaches 0.
The radius of a cylinder is a number, it cannot "approach 0".

While you are imagining an (infinite) family of different three-dimensional shapes, all having the same volume but different surface areas, the post you are responding to is referring to a single three-dimensional shape that has infinite area and finite volume.
 
  • #67


infinte doesn't always mean a number it also means that a number does not exist that's why if we talk about infinite -infinite it doesn't exist
 
  • #68


infinity..?..a professor of mine defined it by this statement which is pretty easy to understand.
"pick a number, infinity is a number always greater than any number so chosen."
so ultimately infinity is a concept number...our way to imagine the end of a number line, or increasing sequence of numbers.
Speaking from a mathematical P.O.V. ur not really allowed to do algebra with infi.
but its like the are "types of infinities", so to speak some may be identical so may not be so.
for a better insight i'd suggest u pick up a book on limits & indeterminates to you know get a better look at algebra in limiting situations.
infi. (+/-) infi. may or may not exist, depending on what function produces the infinity. like
Exp(x)/x -1/x ---> 1 as x--->0 (note that i have an infi.-infi. form on the left.)
 
  • #69


elabed haidar said:
infinte doesn't always mean a number it also means that a number does not exist that's why if we talk about infinite -infinite it doesn't exist

infinity is like a tour that starts and no destination arrived at...it really cannot be defined...beyond any human thinking to be conceivable...and uncountable in the language of real analysis.
 
  • #70


Hurkyl said:
The radius of a cylinder is a number, it cannot "approach 0".

While you are imagining an (infinite) family of different three-dimensional shapes, all having the same volume but different surface areas, the post you are responding to is referring to a single three-dimensional shape that has infinite area and finite volume.


Thanks for comments. But how is it possible not understanding what I say here?
Maybe it is easier understand if you imagine the cylinder as elastic - and the radius resp length as temporary measurements expressed by numbers. Also a shape may change into a kind of limes when a variable is approaching a certain value.

I am not less confused by what you say after that: Where did I say this was the same
thing as what "OP" mentioned? I just mentioned you got the same values for area and volume as in "OP" example. But the kernel for this "interesting" result is the same. You can say my very simple example is a kind of "average" of OP example along total length approaching (excuse that word) infinity.

My example shows the "mechanism" behind "OP" example. How infinite area and limited volume may match.
 
  • #71


Thread closed, since all it seems to be doing these days is attracting the crackpots.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K