Infinite = 1

[Tormod]

Between infinite and -infinite is 0.

 

Of course there's no half-way to infinity or past it.

 

You know, one of the most remarkable things I have read is the history of infinity. That there are many infinities should be obvious. Infinity is a concept which is applied differently in, say, mathematics, cosmology, and psychology.

 

There is no reason to vehemently argue that there is only "one set of infinity". Even if the amount of counting numbers and fractions can be shown to be the same, there are infinities which are unrelated to dimensions.

 

For example, we do not know if our universe is finite or not. If it is infinite, it must contain infinite varieties of infinitely large sub-areas.

 

Second, we do not know if there is more than one universe. If there are, we can assume that there are an infinite amount of universes, each with infinite spatial extent.

 

What does this mean? Nothing. It is pure speculation. But it implies that the topic title is incorrect.

 

Further reading:

A Crash Course in the Mathematics Of Infinite Sets

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/infapp.htm

 

Wikipedia: Infinity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity

[T0M]

Thank you Tormod for joining.

Let us discuss statement by statement then.

 

That there are many infinities should be obvious. Infinity is a concept which is applied differently in, say, mathematics, cosmology, and psychology.

The term is, but its concept remains the same, infinite.

 

There is no reason to vehemently argue that there is only "one set of infinity".

There are less reasons to blindly keep trying to imagine a complete infinite set.

 

Even if the amount of counting numbers and fractions can be shown to be the same, there are infinities which are unrelated to dimensions.

Amount? Counting? Shown to be the same? Shown? :)

You can't be talking about infinite!

Infinite is a dimention itself. So all the "infinities" ARE related to dimentions (from latin "to measure out"). Even though Infinite can't be "measured", it is itself, a "measure". I'm not only talking about space dimentions of course, but in general.

 

For example, we do not know if our universe is finite or not. If it is infinite, it must contain infinite varieties of infinitely large sub-areas.

Second, we do not know if there is more than one universe. If there are, we can assume that there are an infinite amount of universes, each with infinite spatial extent. What does this mean? Nothing. It is pure speculation.

I agree.

 

But it implies that the topic title is incorrect.

In other words: you said that meaningless speculations imply that my topic is incorrect?

 

T0M

[T0M]

Your attempt to insert infinity (and there most certainly is more than one) into a simple fraction and say "See! I've proved it!" is about as convincing as claiming to cure cancer by shaking a dead chicken over the patient's head.

 

In the scheme of things, the first infinity, Aleph-null, is no more than small potatoes.

Well, if my "... attempt to insert infinity... ... into a simple fraction..." is to you like "... claming to cure cancer by shaking a dead chicken..." then you shouldn't read this kind of stuff.

 

Nope. I just mentioned two of them. Mathematically you can form an infinite number of infinite sets between any two points. This thread's headed for strange claims too.

Whatever, they will be all infinite. There won't be different "sizes".

I like Strange Claims Forum!

 

T0M

[Tormod]

T0M, I'l like to warn you that you are coming forth as extremely arrogant. We are actually discussing your ideas but you have your claws out and keep attacking us.

 

It is actually a rule, as has been pointed out, that it is not okay to keep hammering your ideas and ridiculing people. Strange Claims is not a place where you get to ignore our rules. It is a place where topics which are unfounded and not well argued end up. Your personal attitude doesn't help solve this, either.

[Tormod]

There are less reasons to blindly keep trying to imagine a complete infinite set.

 

I think this pretty much sums it up: You are disregarding the input you're getting from us.

 

You are free to walk around and believe there is one infinite set. But you hav failed to prove that this is so.

 

In the meantime, you must also accept that others disagree with you. We do not "blindly keep trying" to do anything. This is borderline flaming.

[Guest T0MM]

T0M, I'l like to warn you that you are coming forth as extremely arrogant. We are actually discussing your ideas but you have your claws out and keep attacking us.

 

It is actually a rule, as has been pointed out, that it is not okay to keep hammering your ideas and ridiculing people. Strange Claims is not a place where you get to ignore our rules. It is a place where topics which are unfounded and not well argued end up. Your personal attitude doesn't help solve this, either.

The difference between my arrogance and yours (or others) is that yours is backed up with "known" accepted concepts, and my concepts are new, not yet known nor accepted. So you kinda want to burn me. But as Freud said (I think it was him):

"Humans are growing! Hundreds of years ago they would have burned me. Now they just burn my books."

So now we burn threads! :)

 

Thank you for your message while leaving me a BAD reputation:

 

"Ignorant. Get over it."

 

I think you as a moderator should not insult users.:)

 

Thanks to your reputation given, I could not play these wonderfull arcade games, so I had to make myself a new user.

I can't start new threads either.

Are you some kind of CENSOR?

 

T0M

 

P.S.: I wish I could just reply to some new argument in reference to the topic, but you had nothing to say, just like your thread says.

P.S.2: As you can see, I just added an M to my nickname. M's are infinite, and so is my patience.

[Guest T0MM]

My God, I just saw you wrote Ingorant... :)

 

T0M

[Tormod]

Please don't registering twice get different usernames. I am removing your last registration. Ask an admin to have it changed instead.

 

And if you think it is an insult to give bad reputation, you should consider how smart it is to post that reputation here.

 

Nobody has said you can't talk about your ideas here. But your behaviour is that of a spoiled child who is used to setting other people straight without concern for whether he is correct or not.

 

You posted in a discussion forum, we discuss your ideas. You however do not seem tol ike the fact that we have different opinion, so you stoop to simple slandering and childish behaviour. As one of the admins of this site it is among my tasks to point out where people go wrong according to our rules, and you have overstepped our lines a couple of times.

[Peter Frisk]

If you have five apples and someone swipes two, you have three left, that's why 5 - 2 is 3.

 

The cardinality of the counting numbers is one of the infinities, commonly called aleph-null. The cardinality of the odds is also aleph-null (ask Cantor) Pull the odds away from the rest, and you're left with the evens, also of cardinality aleph-null. So,

infinity - infinity = infinity.

and all three are the same level of infinity, not "big" infinity minus "smaller" infinity.

 

Hang in here a moment:

the cardinality of all the counting numbers greater than three {4, 5, 6, ...} is also aleph-null. Pull those away from the counting numbers, and you're left with just {1, 2, 3}, a set of cardinality, well, three. So,

infinity - infinity = 3

 

inf - inf can be anything you can rig it to be. That's why it's indeterminate.

[kamil]

If you have five apples and someone swipes two, you have three left, that's why 5 - 2 is 3.

 

The cardinality of the counting numbers is one of the infinities, commonly called aleph-null. The cardinality of the odds is also aleph-null (ask Cantor) Pull the odds away from the rest, and you're left with the evens, also of cardinality aleph-null. So,

infinity - infinity = infinity.

and all three are the same level of infinity, not "big" infinity minus "smaller" infinity.

 

Hang in here a moment:

the cardinality of all the counting numbers greater than three {4, 5, 6, ...} is also aleph-null. Pull those away from the counting numbers, and you're left with just {1, 2, 3}, a set of cardinality, well, three. So,

infinity - infinity = 3

 

inf - inf can be anything you can rig it to be. That's why it's indeterminate.

 

Thats probably one of the most inteligent things i have heard so far in this thread;)

[my brain hurts]

If you have five apples and someone swipes two, you have three left, that's why 5 - 2 is 3.

 

The cardinality of the counting numbers is one of the infinities, commonly called aleph-null. The cardinality of the odds is also aleph-null (ask Cantor) Pull the odds away from the rest, and you're left with the evens, also of cardinality aleph-null. So,

infinity - infinity = infinity.

and all three are the same level of infinity, not "big" infinity minus "smaller" infinity.

 

Hang in here a moment:

the cardinality of all the counting numbers greater than three {4, 5, 6, ...} is also aleph-null. Pull those away from the counting numbers, and you're left with just {1, 2, 3}, a set of cardinality, well, three. So,

infinity - infinity = 3

 

inf - inf can be anything you can rig it to be. That's why it's indeterminate.

 

That's an excellent elucidation of the subject, Mr. Frisk. One of the hallmarks of an infinite set is that you can take things away from it and still be left with infinity, which flies in the face of what most folks would call normal common sense. We simply don't encounter numbers that operate like that in daily life, and not only is it quite off-putting, it leads us to many erroneous conclusions. An example would be this old argument-

There cannot be an infinite number of stars, for if there were, the entire sky would be lit up, since you would see a star no matter which direction you looked. Of course, a set can be infinite and at the same time incomplete- the set of even integers is infinite but doesn't contain any odd number, the set of rationals doesn't contain any irrationals, etc.

 

One of the great things that Cantor (and others) realised is that, when considering the infinite, we suffer from the same dilemma as a caveman who can only count to three but wnats to know how many fingers he has. He can still tell that he has the same number of fingers on his right hand as on his left (though he can't name the number), because he can put them into a one to one correspondence- thumb to thumb, index to index. This simple concept leads to some extraordinary conclusions.

 

If one considers travelling up the number line, clicking past the mileposts, we seem to go for a very long, monotonous way, with nothing unusual happening. Then, amazingly, all hell breaks loose, with numbers taking on properties that are unfathomable.

[Turtle]

That's an excellent elucidation of the subject, Mr. Frisk. ...If one considers travelling up the number line, clicking past the mileposts, we seem to go for a very long, monotonous way, with nothing unusual happening. Then, amazingly, all hell breaks loose, with numbers taking on properties that are unfathomable.

___Here-here to the bolded quote on Mr. Frisk's elucidation; cogent on both accounts.

___As to the mileposts' monotany before anything interesting happens, I take some exception; however unfathomable I concurr on if only limited by time & degree. From the get go we have the ideas of prime, perfect, figurate, evolution(powers), residues, & no end of similar number theoretical topics. Nothing gets me more excited than unity; one. How unfathomable is that?:lol:

:xparty:

[my brain hurts]

___Here-here to the bolded quote on Mr. Frisk's elucidation; cogent on both accounts.

___As to the mileposts' monotany before anything interesting happens, I take some exception; however unfathomable I concurr on if only limited by time & degree. From the get go we have the ideas of prime, perfect, figurate, evolution(powers), residues, & no end of similar number theoretical topics. Nothing gets me more excited than unity; one. How unfathomable is that?:lol:

:xparty:

 

 

That's why my favorite equation is e^(pi*j)+1=0

 

It relates five of the most exquisite concepts of math into one neat little package. Just think-

 

0 The additive identity. Infinity's evil twin.

 

1 Unity. So cool it's not even considered a prime. The multiplicative identity. Turtle's favorite number.

 

pi Antiquity's greatest accomplishment.

 

e My favorite number. If you ever run into someone with "e" number of fingers, don't gamble with him. The base that controls everything.

 

j Wow. Numbers don't even have to be real to make sense and have value.

 

 

That an irrational number raised to the power of the product of an imaginary number and an irrational should yield -1 is absolutely staggering, and suggests an order to the universe that scares me.

[Turtle]

___I have some special infinite sets of numbers exposited here at Hypography that have some mysteries yet explored. Strange, Bizarre, Curious, Peculiar, etc. sets of the Set of Unusual Sets, or so I have called them. Let's chop some wood, kick it up a notch, & otherwise as they say "just do it". The challenge is to understand the definitions & add to the lists posted in regard to anomolous Numbers within the sets. Never before seen or known. Go!:xparty:

http://hypography.com/forums/physics-mathematics/1220-strange-numbers.html

The Infinite Set S, Strange Numbers - Base Ten

{24, 30,42, 54, 66, 78, 102, 114, 138, 174, 186, 222, 246, 258, 282, 304, 318, 354, 366, 402, ...}

Happy New Year!:lol: :) :D :eek: :) :eek:

[Peter Frisk]

If one considers travelling up the number line, clicking past the mileposts, we seem to go for a very long, monotonous way, with nothing unusual happening.

 

Numbers are interesting, and for various reasons-- 0 and 1 as identities, 2 the only even prime, 6 the smallest perfect number, 1009 the smallest four-digit prime, and so on.

 

Have you encountered the throrem that all counting numbers are interesting?

 

The proof is easy: Suppose, to the contrary, that there exist uninteresting numbers. Consider the set of all uninteresting numbers.

 

Because the integers are ordered, there exists a smallest uninteresting number.

 

Hmmmm.... how interesting...

[rocket art]

infinite - infinite =finite existence (what you see everywhere now) :)