Reality works differently, there are limits and bounds, unlike in your abstract mathematical example. You are talking about Zeno's paradox, and the answer is that in reality space is not infinitely divisible.
Is very finite number of ways that matter can be arranged?
- Thread starter Tailspin
- Start date
Reality works differently, there are limits and bounds, unlike in your abstract mathematical example. You are talking about Zeno's paradox, and the answer is that in reality space is not infinitely divisible.
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
We are talking about math, that which is used to describe reality.
Will you please answer the question and stop trying to make worse your integrity problem?
I'm talking about reality which is described by actual real world measurements.
In the real world, there is non-infinite number of combinations of squares that could be painted on any given canvas size.
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
Measurements using numbers and math and units? Those real world measurements?
So you're saying the math doesn't describe reality correctly, so it's of no use and can't be relied on? Or do you pick and choose when you need it and when you hide it?
Any math can not describe it, you need the math of Quantum Mechanics.
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
So quantum mechanics supersedes basic division, such as 1/4=.25???
Reality overrides assumptions. Just how small do you think you can draw a square in the real world? Can it be smaller than an atom for example?
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
The question is can you draw it, in the real world, smaller than one atom?
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
What does drawing a square in the real world have to do with how many mathematical perfect squares fit into a mathematical 1 square meter square, and how big those perfect squares are??
Your confusion is not honest, it's an integrity problem, because you have an agenda to meet, and this doesn't fit your agenda.
Don't you hate it when the facts stand in the way of your BS?
This is an interesting discussion. I think that MD is of the opinion that geometry and math allow for infinites, even if it is simply in the number of points on a line that an artist draws, or as I was saying, in the relative orientation of two spinning spheres that a artist may set up to prove his view that there can be an infinite number of different creations. There are many ways to have infinite mathematical positions, and any one would allow Tailspin to live happily until the asteroid hits, lol.
On the ohter hand, people talk about physical reality where objects are composed of matter that can be as small as science can observe, work with, divide, or even predict based on experiments with particles, but as Humbleteleskop is conveying, there is a physical limit to what we call "tiny" in the real world.
As an aside, using the math of QM, I think that you have infinite possibilities all the time because of randomness and probability.
You are insane, pal. The OP question was about the real world.
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
How many different combinations are there in the real world?
537,893,745?
How can you sleep at night with all that internal fighting in your brain trying to work out how you're going to juggle the truth and the lie and make it all work?
Thank you for writing back quantum wave.
As I understand it, theoretically there could be an infinite number of points but they have become so tiny that no one would ever possibly notice them.
This morning I've been looking at various articles on this subject and they all say that there is indeed a finite number of ways that all matter can be arranged in any given space and that there is simply no arguing about it. They're talking like it's not even a theory but a proven fact.
As I understand it, theoretically there could be an infinite number of points but they have become so tiny that no one would ever possibly notice them.
This morning I've been looking at various articles on this subject and they all say that there is indeed a finite number of ways that all matter can be arranged in any given space and that there is simply no arguing about it. They're talking like it's not even a theory but a proven fact.
Molecules can not be arranged arbitrarily, there is a non-infinite number of combinations how atoms can be arranged in a stable static state over some canvas with a certain size.
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
A stable state meaning no radiation or decay?
...and again, if there is a finite number, what is that number?
Perhaps you are talking about classical combinations when you talk about putting atoms on a canvas, while if you consider the quantum mechanics of the atoms that you place on the canvas, there are infinite possibilities as to the states that you can observe when you look at the canvas, combined with the states that are in superposition in the atoms that are not observed?
I'm talking about molecular combinations, each of which has its own energy equilibrium which defines its stability. Atoms can not be arranged arbitrarily, there are minimum distances and maximum distances, and there are specific angles their arrangements have to obey.
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
Sounds scary. Is that all modeled in an absolute space and time?
...still waitin' on that number...
What I'm trying to find out is: Is this a theory or a proven fact? Do we know this for certain or is it just the belief of a few? Is there room for doubt?