A speck in space

[bugbear]

Well, if infinity is infinity then what is infinity + 1 ?

An infinite number doesn't behave like finite numbers - that's rather the point.

For a gentle (and entertaining) introduction, Hilbert's Hotel paradox is superb. Here's a version by Marcus du Sautoy:

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol ... 181874.ece

BugBear

 

[myturn]

However, similar to the discussion of 'what the universe is expanding into' or 'what is outside the universe', the balloon is not expanding into anything at all, just getting bigger itself.
Adam

That prompts me to think inside the box.

If you put the balloon in a box it won't expand so therefore when outside the box and it expands it must be expanding into something, even though that something is made of stuff that does not hinder its expansion.

 

[gus3049]

Well, if infinity is infinity then what is infinity + 1 ?

An infinite number doesn't behave like finite numbers - that rather the point.

For a gentle (and entertaining) introduction, Hilbert's Hotel paradox is superb. Here's a version by Marcus du Sautoy:

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol ... 181874.ece

BugBear

Now I know why I was no good at math and decided just to make stuff. Probably crooked but artistically so.

 

[studders]

Well, so far, none of the explanations of infinity, or how one infinity can be 'bigger' than another, make any sense to me. Infinity is Infinity, it has no direction or form in itself so how can attempts be made to compare it to anything else, or itself?
I also am dubious of claims made about Space. How do we know whether it is infinite or not?

 

[newt]

Here is another thing about space that makes your brain hurt. If you are an observer in space looking at two bodies moving towards each other the closing velocity is the sum of the individual velocities. Therefore two bodies traveling each at 500 Kph towards each other closing velocity = 1000 Kph, no problem, likewise each at 10000 closing velocity 20000. Then if each is traveling at the speed of light the closing velocity is only the speed of light. Bummer I think thats how it was explained to me when I did some Physics.

 

[theartfulbodger]

All this is making my head hurt.

I'm off to start a thread on imaginary numbers.

 

[bugbear]

All this is making my head hurt.

I'm off to start a thread on imaginary numbers.

I love the extensive benefits one can get from things that don't exist!

BugBear

 

[StevieB]

Well, if infinity is infinity then what is infinity + 1 ?

infinity.
But then what is infinity x infinity?
Again infinity, but a different order of infinity!

Imagine a piece of graph paper, where the x axis is infinitely long but the y axis is just one high - that's infinity.
Now make the y axis infinitely long as well - that's infinity x infinity.
Now remember that there are an infinite number of infinitesimally small point in each square - that's infinity x infinity x infinity!

Have a look here, if you're still awake

Unfortunately you are treating infinity as a whole number, when actually it is a description of a series. Its akin to asking what is length x length - its a nonsense because length is not a specified distance but rather a concept.

As to the original query of what is outside the universe - we only define what we can see by the laws of physics we currently understand and can apply within our own universe. If the laws within our physical universe do not exist outside of the event horizon of the expanding universe then asking what it is expanding into is a nonsense. In the same way, asking what was there before the 'big bang' is also a nonsense if we accept the scientific theory that the currently physical laws only came into being at the time of the big bang. Its impossible to answer in the same way as 'where were you before you were conceived' or 'where do you go to when you die'. As an ape only recently descended from the trees who thinks walking on his hind legs and having opposable thumbs is quite a cool idea, we are quite capable of asking questions to which we cannot answer!

 

[RogerS]

That reminds me, time to go and ask Schrödinger how his cat is.

 

[Kalimna]

Stevie - much more succinctly put than I managed in my ramble!

One might as well ask what colour is your age???........

Oh, and RogerS - don't look at the cat - you might kill it

Adam S

 

[bugbear]

BugBear

 

[newt]

Bring back the J operator, or has it never gone?

 

[bugbear]

Bring back the J operator, or has it never gone?

I suspect (guessing) you mean the "j" value, which is what the engineering and electronics crowd call the mathematicians' "i", because over in the world of engineering "i" was already being used in equations to denote electrical current

BugBear

 

[RogerS]

Ah, 'J', the square root of -1 IIRC

 

[theartfulbodger]

I knew j as i, but that was mechanical engineering not electrical. The maths involved still makes me shudder.

 

[Karl]

That's great. I'll be able to give you a call and have it all explained to me!

Might be a little while before you get the phone call Roger - it's definitely a double reader!

Cheers

Karl

 

[Digit]

If the universe 'creates' itself by expanding into 'nothingness' then 'nothingness' must be getting smaller!

Roy.

 

[studders]

Unless of course nothingness expands into asyetnamelessness and thus remains constant.

 

[Digit]

Popular science often results in misunderstandings, this is so on this subject.
The detectable universe is some 26-30 Billion light years across. This means that either there is nothing beyond that horizon or that the universe is some 13-15 Billion years old.
For there to be nothing beyond that horizon the Earth would have to be slap bang in the central axes of the universe, somewhat unlikely. Thus beyond the universe must be stellar radiation, thus the universe muct extend beyond its physical outer limits.

Roy.