What is the concept of infinity and its relation to physical quantities?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rainbow
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Infinity is a concept representing an unbounded quantity that exceeds all finite values. It cannot be quantified in traditional numerical terms, as it is inherently abstract. When discussing infinite sets, the notion of "size" can vary based on the method of measurement, such as cardinality, which can lead to counterintuitive results. In physics, referring to a quantity as infinite often indicates a breakdown in theoretical models, where intuition is used to interpret the implications. Overall, infinity signifies a limit that cannot be reached or defined by conventional means.
Rainbow
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
My question is simple,

What is INFINITY?

How big or small is it?

What does one mean when he/she says that something(generally a physical quantity) is infinite?

Please help me with this.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It's more of a concept rather than a number. So when you say "infinite," you can't really say how large it is.
 
Rainbow said:
My question is simple,

What is INFINITY?

How big or small is it?

It's bigger than that.
 
Rainbow said:
My question is simple,

What is INFINITY?

How big or small is it?

What does one mean when he/she says that something(generally a physical quantity) is infinite?

Please help me with this.

Infinity generally refers to a quantity that is without bound, ie., it is greater than all finite quantities. For example, the amount of natural numbers in the set of natural numbers is infinite because if the amount was a natural number, one could always find a natural number greater than that number by adding 1 to your number, contradicting the hypothesis that the amount is a natural number.
When referring to the "size" of an infinite set, one must then define how one wants to measure "size". For example, the set of all real numbers in the unit interval [0,1] is infinite but the interval [0,2] is larger than [0,1]. That's one way. But there is a problem. If you let f(x)=2x, you not only get f([0,1]) = [0,2], but each element in [0,1] is associated with a unique element in [0,2], giving the impression that [0,1] and [0,2] somehow have the same amount of elements. This is another measure of size called cardinality.
When one says a physical quantity is infinite, one is usually referring to a mathematical abstraction of the quantity, ie., slope, density, etc. It is usually a place in the equations where the theory breaks down and one relies on intuition to associate the infinity with a physical situation.
 
Infinity generally refers to a quantity that is without bound, ie., it is greater than all finite quantities.

Those two phrases are not synonymous: any quantity serves as its own bound (both upper and lower bound). :-p


I should point out that the +∞ and -∞ one sees in analysis (and thus in physics) has absolutely nothing to do with sizes of sets.
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
31
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
64
Views
5K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top