# My argument why Hilbert's Hotel is not a veridical Paradox

• B
• dakiprae
In summary: In fact, it's the only way that the sentence, every guest moves into the next room, hides the fact, that we don't understand what will happen in this infinite thought experiment (mathematically and logically).In summary, the sentence "every guest moves into the next room" hides the fact that we don't understand what will happen in an infinite thought experiment.
dakiprae
TL;DR Summary
Hilbert's Hotel often shown as a veridical Paradox. I want to show my argument, why the argument 'every guest n moves into the next room n+1' is not provable true.
Hello there,

I had another similar post, where asking for proof for Hilbert’s Hotel.

After rethinking this topic, I want to show you a new example. It tries to show why that the sentence, every guest moves into the next room, hides the fact, that we don’t understand what will happen in this infinite thought experiment (mathematically and logically).

If you don't know Hilbert's Hotel you can read it on Wikipedia:

Wikipedia article of Hilberts Hotel captor Analysis:

My argument, why I think it is not provable true:
First I want to explain my own example (A), than we go back to Hilbert's Hotel (B): Guest 1 moves out and knocks on Guest 2’s door. Guest 2 goes out. Guest 1 moves in the Room 2 and Guest 2 knocks on Guest 3’s door. Repeat this process every second. If you repeat this forever, there is always one guest n outside knocking on n+1's door. Here we have potential infinity, but never reach infinity. But after an infinite amount of time, every single guest moved. Finally, every guest n has moved in n + 1 Room. No more guest is outside anymore, because all moved. Something happens, which used to be impossible before.

Back to Hilbert's Hotel (B): The mathematical or logical argument for Hilbert's Hotel Paradox is: Every guest can move to n + 1 room. So you can make room for any new guest (Peano axioms).

I would say, there is no logical or mathematical proof, that every single guest will move into the next room in this thought experiment. It's not clear what will happen in this infinity scenario. If you go with my argument, Hilbert’s Hotel is an unsolved topic and not a veridical paradox. Saying every guest moves into the next room in Hilbert's Hotel is like saying every guest moves into the next room in my example (A) above. I am not sure, if every guest moves into the next room, because I don't know how this infinite sets interact with each other. If we don't know how this two infinite sets, Guests and Rooms, interacts with each other, than it is an unsolved topic.

weirdoguy
dakiprae said:
If you go with my argument, Hilbert’s Hotel is an unsolved topic ...

That's why your argument has little or no value. Mathematics is not going to retreat 200 years just because one novice doesn't understand it!

dakiprae said:
Guest 1 moves out and knocks on Guest 2’s door. Guest 2 goes out. Guest 1 moves in the Room 2 and Guest 2 knocks on Guest 3’s door. Repeat this process every second.

I think you're going to have a problem with this part. Guest 2 has to get out of bed, pack away all of his luggage, ransack the free pens and sewing kits, put his shoes on, answer the door and proceed to go and hassle his hotel neighbour in the space of just 1 second.

etotheipi said:
I think you're going to have a problem with this part. Guest 2 has to get out of bed, pack away all of his luggage, ransack the free pens and sewing kits, put his shoes on, answer the door and proceed to go and hassle his hotel neighbour in the space of just 1 second.
Time is relative :D

dakiprae said:
The mathematical or logical argument for Hilbert's Hotel Paradox is: Every guest can move to n + 1 room. So you can make room for any new guest (Peano axioms).
What you wrote isn't what you actually meant. What you wrote is that every guest moves to room n + 1.
dakiprae said:
I would say, there is no logical or mathematical proof, that every single guest will move into the next room in this thought experiment. It's not clear what will happen in this infinity scenario.
On the contrary, it's very clear what will happen. At a given time, each guest moves to the next higher room number. Infinity doesn't play a role here.
dakiprae said:
If we don't know how this two infinite sets, Guests and Rooms, interacts with each other, than it is an unsolved topic.
But we do know how these two infinite sets interact by virtue of a one-to-one mapping between guests and rooms. If Guesti is in Roomj before the move, with ##1 \le i, 1 \le j##, then after the move, Guesti will be in Roomj+1, and Room1 will be unoccupied.

dakiprae said:
Guest 1 moves in the Room 2 and Guest 2 knocks on Guest 3’s door. Repeat this process every second. If you repeat this forever, there is always one guest n outside knocking on n+1's door.
This is why your argument fails. In the Hilbert Hotel scenario, all guests move at the same time, not one after another.

Keep in mind that the idea that all guests can move at the same moment is just as plausible as the idea that such a thing as a hotel with an infinite number of rooms can exist. This is, after all, purely a thought experiment.

Mark44 said:
This is, after all, purely a thought experiment.
I'd say it's pure mathematics!

Mark44 said:
This is why your argument fails. In the Hilbert Hotel scenario, all guests move at the same time, not one after another.

I. In (B) all guests move at the same time.

II. In (A) all guests move after an infinite amount of time.

I is an argument like II, both bridge infinity. But in II. the problem gets visible directly, because one guest should stay out in every case.

PeroK and weirdoguy
dakiprae said:
I. In (B) all guests move at the same time.
Yes
dakiprae said:
II. In (A) all guests move after an infinite amount of time.
No, that's not part of the scenario.
dakiprae said:
I is an argument like II, both bridge infinity.
No. Infinity itself never plays a role in any of the calculations.
dakiprae said:
But in II. the problem gets visible directly, because one guest should stay out in every case.
There were 61 posts in the first thread you opened, and any questions you had were amply discussed in that thread.

Since you still don't seem to get the logic behind the Hilbert Hotel, and are still espousing the same ideas that were refuted in the earlier thread, I am closing this thread.

berkeman, weirdoguy and PeroK

## 1. What is Hilbert's Hotel?

Hilbert's Hotel is a thought experiment created by mathematician David Hilbert to illustrate the concept of infinite sets. It involves a hotel with an infinite number of rooms, all of which are occupied. When a new guest arrives, the hotel manager is able to accommodate them by moving each guest to the next room number, effectively creating an infinite number of vacancies.

## 2. What is a veridical paradox?

A veridical paradox is a statement or situation that appears to be contradictory or logically impossible, but is actually true or possible.

## 3. How does Hilbert's Hotel challenge the concept of infinity?

Hilbert's Hotel challenges the concept of infinity by showing that it can lead to counterintuitive and seemingly impossible situations. In the case of the hotel, it demonstrates that an infinite number of things (rooms) can be added to an already infinite set without changing the number of things in the set.

## 4. What is your argument for why Hilbert's Hotel is not a veridical paradox?

My argument is that while Hilbert's Hotel may seem paradoxical, it is not a true paradox because it relies on a flawed understanding of infinity. In reality, infinity is a concept that cannot be fully comprehended or accurately represented in the physical world. Therefore, the situations presented in Hilbert's Hotel are not truly possible and do not accurately reflect the nature of infinity.

## 5. How does understanding Hilbert's Hotel and the concept of infinity impact scientific thinking?

Understanding Hilbert's Hotel and the concept of infinity can help scientists to think critically and creatively about complex and abstract ideas. It can also lead to a deeper understanding of the limitations of human understanding and the need for mathematical and scientific models to approximate reality rather than fully represent it.

• General Math
Replies
69
Views
6K
• General Math
Replies
73
Views
4K
• Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
7
Views
2K
• General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
• General Math
Replies
18
Views
4K
• Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
9K
• General Math
Replies
89
Views
21K
• Special and General Relativity
Replies
24
Views
2K
• General Math
Replies
55
Views
4K