Religious people aren't built for logical debate.

There is no mid-point if infinity is actual.

Both infinities, of the largest and the smallest, would have equal extent, and so there would always be an exact mid-point. The cosmos has neither a ceiling nor a floor, but it has a middle.
 
The above has been the same problem I have been running around in my head. I gave up on finding the answer. How can infinity be created by an agent of intelligence. But now I think I have a model that could work. I am writing a book you see. It's fiction, but it will build this idea; I think i may have just decided on the finale of book 6. I am writing a paper as well but I am not so sure how these types of musings are received into publication, are you?

You could put the writings here for evaluation and refinement. Victor Stenger got into publication by first becoming a notable physicist, writing about that, and then extending into atheism via science, with lots of facts.

There's always Amazon, and createspace.com will put your book there for nearly free (you have to buy a cheap proof copy, which you would want to have anyway). They even give a free ISBN. It's also true that about 6000 books come out every day now.
 
Isn't it funny how just thinking about stuff even if it is against your own, can trigger a new understanding in ones-own already direction?

Yes, that's why I search every dark alley, even supposed dead-ends, trying to go where the facts lead, with no inherent bias steering me away.
 
SciWriter said:
Yes but do we speak of a god of universes or multiverses or infinity. How can a composite complex universe arise? same thing . . .

Complex, composite non Gods are fine, but they can't be the Creator of everything.

Infinity also goes against the gain of intuition, for the word essentially means "that which can never be attained", as does eternity meaning "that which never began nor will end", but accept these we must, for beginnings are more impossible, for any theory with a beginning or a boundary have something before or outside it, which really takes away from it being the All.
Click to expand...

Ok so we are calling God a creator of everything. Even though a subjective god is possible, even for this universe's creation.

But what of the lack of our understanding? Maybe we just don't get it? The concept?

I agree with the infinity you describe, though I think I now have a mode that works for a creator/system of All. Wish I could share it but it is going to be book 6 I think :) It isn't related to our discussion but part of my independent framework.
 
I didn't want to clog up your thread, but you like these avenues of inspiration, so how about this?

Einstein’s 4D ‘block universe’ (or 4D space-time), a hypercube externally, is internally as an infinite number of infinite 3D spaces stacked upon one another, which can be called the 4D hypercube. It’s hard to visualize 4D, but one can generalize it from imagining a stacking of infinite 3D ‘pancakes’. So, in seeing this 4D hypercube of 3D spaces, one can visualize that time is the difference of space(s), an index, it also serving as both motion and charge.

The converse is that space is the difference of time, this being distance. Energy/mass is basically curved space. Space is physical, but not material. 3D space is infinite and is therefore the bounding “surface” of the contained and finite 4D hypercube.

The speed of light, 'c', is really more than than the distance/time dimensional units, but is a reduction to that, via…

the external 4D hypercube, distance^4, divided by internal 3D space-time, time*distance^3, which results in 'c', as reduced, to distance/time, in dimensional units.
 
SciWriter said:
There's always Amazon, and createspace.com will put your book there for nearly free (you have to buy a cheap proof copy, which you would want to have anyway). They even give a free ISBN. It's also true that about 6000 books come out every day now.
Click to expand...

I will publish my fiction in the conventional way. Well that is my aim. Depends on that avenue being a success or not that will be my next step. Though book is still in planning. I am nearly of the understanding to write it, in a writers skill sense. Bout 75,000 at the moment.

The paper will have to be a journal or magazine of some sort? I though that could be the convention though wondered what you felt? Is this stuff science, or do I go fro something more speculative?
 
SciWriter said:
There is no mid-point if infinity is actual.

Both infinities, of the largest and the smallest, would have equal extent, and so there would always be an exact mid-point. The cosmos has neither a ceiling nor a floor, but it has a middle.
Click to expand...

I do not agree with this conceptually. No beginning, no end, no middle (for me :)) There is no extent as there is no measurement of infinity.
 
SciWriter said:
I didn't want to clog up your thread, but you like these avenues of inspiration, so how about this?

Einstein’s 4D ‘block universe’ (or 4D space-time), a hypercube externally, is internally as an infinite number of infinite 3D spaces stacked upon one another, which can be called the 4D hypercube. It’s hard to visualize 4D, but one can generalize it from imagining a stacking of infinite 3D ‘pancakes’. So, in seeing this 4D hypercube of 3D spaces, one can visualize that time is the difference of space(s), an index, it also serving as both motion and charge.

The converse is that space is the difference of time, this being distance. Energy/mass is basically curved space. Space is physical, but not material. 3D space is infinite and is therefore the bounding “surface” of the contained and finite 4D hypercube.

The speed of light, 'c', is really more than than the distance/time dimensional units, but is a reduction to that, via…

the external 4D hypercube, distance^4, divided by internal 3D space-time, time*distance^3, which results in 'c', as reduced, to distance/time, in dimensional units.
Click to expand...

Don't think anyone else is coming here for a while anyway lol.
 
universaldistress said:
Ok so we are calling God a creator of everything. Even though a subjective god is possible, even for this universe's creation.

But what of the lack of our understanding? Maybe we just don't get it? The concept?

I agree with the infinity you describe, though I think I now have a mode that works for a creator/system of All. Wish I could share it but it is going to be book 6 I think :) It isn't related to our discussion but part of my independent framework.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd have to say that 'God' has to be the source, origin, and creator of everything but Himself, or he wouldn't be God, but just some smart alien who was able to scientifically terraform a moon or a planet, or more. We, too, may get to that stage of intelligence, but you can see it's at the complete opposite end of the spectrum from simple and the small. Yet, all is/was forever and also of infinite extent, and so this has already happened somewhere, sometime, again and again, if it is at all possible, which it would seem to be.
 
universaldistress said:
I do not agree with this conceptually. No beginning, no end, no middle (for me :)) There is no extent as there is no measurement of infinity.
Click to expand...
Agreed. If something is infinite in extent then anywhere you pick is the "middle" since there's just as much on either "side" from that spot as there is at any other.
You can't say "To my left lies 1/4 of infinity and to my right is 3/4 of it..."
 
universaldistress said:
I do not agree with this conceptually. No beginning, no end, no middle (for me :)) There is no extent as there is no measurement of infinity.
Click to expand...

Well, at least if all sizes are indeed relative, infinitely, we still have a clear ordering to sizes in our finite realm.

Also, if it were to turn out that the Planck size is really the limit of the small, then this would put 'size' an an absolute scale, which is fine, although the size of the largest would still be unbounded.

Anyway, I don't think it is of direct importance to my theory, but we don't seem to be able to have our being exist at the size of Planck or smaller, nor as really humongous guys.
 
SciWriter said:
There is no mid-point if infinity is actual.

Both infinities, of the largest and the smallest, would have equal extent, and so there would always be an exact mid-point. The cosmos has neither a ceiling nor a floor, but it has a middle.
Click to expand...

universaldistress said:
I do not agree with this conceptually. No beginning, no end, no middle (for me :)) There is no extent as there is no measurement of infinity.
Click to expand...

This seems like a subjective viewpoint, like it is trying to find a place to view from, measure from. But to understand infinity one has to see it all at once in its entirety.
 
I could go with the center of All being everywhere, as well as the All being shapeless, since no boundary, and a point also being shapeless, assuming no boundary there either.

Nothing, everything, unbounded duration and extent all seem to have to be in the package together, along with with no special time or place, no special anything at all. And so we get away from having to account for specific locations in times for any happenings, for there can be no accounting for the causeless.
 
Dywyddyr said:
Agreed. If something is infinite in extent then anywhere you pick is the "middle" since there's just as much on either "side" from that spot as there is at any other.
You can't say "To my left lies 1/4 of infinity and to my right is 3/4 of it..."
Click to expand...

No, there is no middle. Middle is a concept of a measurable area. Infinity is immeasurable hence no middle (for me I might add :))
 
That's what I said! :p
Wherever you pick on an infinite line you have equal amounts on either side: isn't that a reasonable definition of "middle"?
 
SciWriter said:
Well, at least if all sizes are indeed relative, infinitely, we still have a clear ordering to sizes in our finite realm.

Also, if it were to turn out that the Planck size is really the limit of the small, then this would put 'size' an an absolute scale, which is fine, although the size of the largest would still be unbounded.

Anyway, I don't think it is of direct importance to my theory, but we don't seem to be able to have our being exist at the size of Planck or smaller, nor as really humongous guys.
Click to expand...

This seems coloured by evidence. Infinity is not.

If there is a limit on the planck size then all bets are off. Infinity is infinite. No boundary.
 
SciWriter said:
I could go with the center of All being everywhere, as well as the All being shapeless, since no boundary, and a point also being shapeless, assuming no boundary there either.

Nothing, everything, unbounded duration and extent all seem to have to be in the package together, along with with no special time or place, no special anything at all. And so we get away from having to account for specific locations in times for any happenings, for there can be no accounting for the causeless.
Click to expand...

Do not bias oneself. Just flow with it.

No centre. Things still occur within. You are still trying to quantify/account for. Infinity is unquantifiable?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top