What are the implications of infinity?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter david2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of infinity, exploring its implications in mathematics and physics. Participants examine various aspects of infinity, including its relationship to distance, movement, and mathematical constructs. The conversation includes theoretical considerations, conceptual clarifications, and references to historical figures and paradoxes.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if every part of infinity is infinite, then the universe cannot be infinite because movement would be impossible.
  • Others argue that there are infinite non-overlapping intervals within a finite distance, suggesting that infinity does not prevent movement.
  • A later reply questions the notion of dividing distances into infinite segments, asserting that each segment remains finite.
  • Some participants discuss the distinction between potential and completed infinity, referencing Cantor's work on infinite sets.
  • There are claims about mathematical implications of infinity, such as the equivalence of 0.999... and 1, and the assertion that infinity equals -1/12, though this claim is contested.
  • Participants mention historical figures like Riemann and Cantor in relation to the quantification of infinity and its properties.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of infinity and its implications. There is no consensus on the interpretations or conclusions drawn from the discussions about infinity.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the nature of infinity, the definitions of mathematical concepts, and the implications of dividing distances. Some mathematical claims remain unresolved or are challenged by other participants.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring mathematical concepts, philosophical implications of infinity, or the intersection of physics and mathematics.

  • #31
PeroK said:
A sequence is a mathematical object. Let's take two examples:

##1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 \dots##

This sequence has the property that it converges to a limit - in fact, it converges to 0. This is a mathematically well-defined property.

Note that the limit is not part of the sequence; it is a property of the entire sequence. In particular, it is not true that "the sequence eventually reaches 0 at infinity". This may be intuitively how non-mathematicians think of a limit. But, it is mathematically not sound.

However, when modelling a physical process by such a sequence, this allows you to say that eventually the physical process reduces to 0. To be more precise, you could say that eventually the process reduces to the point where it is no longer measurable and is in all practical terms 0.

Your sequence:

##1, 0, 1, 0 \dots##

Has the property that it does not converge. It has no limit.

If you model a physical process by this sequence, then there is no natural end state. There is no mathematical limit that could be assigned to the process once it has terminated.

This means that is you want to include the end state, then you must change the model somehow.

In any case, this says nothing paradoxical about either the mathematics or the physics. Simply that you don't have a fully viable model of the physical situation that includes an end state.

My sequence was 1, -1, 1, -1...
I'm putting it as a function where the count number of the individual numbers in the sequence are not counted as 1, 2, 3... but something like 1/1, 1/2, 1/3... so that although the numbers in the sequence do not have a limit, the count numbers do. In this kind of function where the numbers of the sequence are y and the numbers of the count (indexes) are x, this makes x approach a limit. The numbers of the sequence do not have a limit, but the counts do...

I think this is analogous to a version for Zeno's paradox where instead of counting the decreasing distance measures we count the runner's steps and have him run with increasingly smaller running strides of increasing frequency, and asking which foot hits the ground after the limit. In both the original and in this version of the paradox, Zeno does run through the limit, so asking about what happens past the limit is legitimate... still in the domain of x isn't it?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #32
bahamagreen said:
run with increasingly smaller running strides of increasing frequency, and asking which foot hits the ground after the limit.
We should probably take the discussion of supertasks, convergence and infinite cardinalities to another thread.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K