as an introduction and to say hi, here is something that may confound you as it has me and many others…
MUST ALL THINGS COME TO AN END!
i don’t really need to elaborate but to say that stretched over an infinite amount of time eventually all existence, including all possible universes [even if we say that the universe is cyclic] must come to an end.
the most interesting thing for me is then to ask; what would that state be? you may think well it would be nothing, but e.g. would that nothing have dimension, more importantly what would stop something arising in it? we may say that if we reach the ultimate end, may we not also reach an ultimate beginning? then are they the same place? if so is the universe the ghost of itself… that is; the history of the dead universe would be present at the beginning of the very same universe [or set of universes]. perhaps we may even ask if the said history was the very potentiality upon which existence was founded [just thought i would stretch the idea a tad there].
It might be better to state all things must change. Of course this is not nearly dramatic enough for some people but, it suits the universe’s antics much better.
that is not the same? we may perhaps say that if all things must change then the ultimate change would be to end all things. the two somehow fit into one another interestingly.
i don’t think it is a case of dramatics it is a logical supposition, perhaps even the ultimate in inevitability.
Matter does not come to an end, as you can not destroy it. A table can come to an end because you break it…it is no longer a table, but it still exists.
same as to define limited or at least within the idea. then we may compare to the unlimited.
true energy is conserved ~ whilst there is energy. this tells us that there is always the same amount of energy for as long as energy exists. it may be so that energy began, if not then it must be infinite ~ yet we know it is not! it is a limited exact amount.
so it comes down to finite VS infinite, energy being finite cannot compare it has a limit at least in terms of size, how then can it not have a limit in time. indeed time itself must have an ultimate limit as it to is finite.
this is a difficult side of the argument because energy does not reduce then we may ask what its limit is? i often wonder if it is possible to have a whole and absolute with change occuring within it but not affecting it?
Reality, in which the observable universe resides , does not end. It also never began. The universe we know “began” within a reality we don’t know and may never understand, due to our possible inability to observe or calculate its key properties.
One key property of reality we can calculate through logical deduction is its eternity. We can conclude that in order for anything to exist, something had to have always been there - some form of energy. The energy from which our universe sprang didn’t come from nowhere. There is no such place. There is no place within reality that is truly a void or realm of nothingness. Such things are just figments of our imaginations.
The prime energy of reality is always “there” in some form or other and not under the influence of time or space as we know them. Rather, time and space are properties of reality. Our universe is under the influence of these properties. Our best guess is that time and space (space-time) didn’t exist within our universe until the advent of the expansion. That does not mean that time and space did not exist within reality before our universe acquired these properties (if that’s what happened). We know the universe’s energy was in existence before a catalyst altered its properties - dramatically, as far as our vantage point is concerned. We can only wonder how big or small a fraction of reality our universe is. We can only wonder how many more dimensions reality has than our universe. Is it 50 to our 4? Is it 12 to our 11? Is the number the same?
Reality is everywhere, everything, and timeless, to put it in terms we can understand. There is no such thing as “nothing” and never could have been such a thing as a completely empty reality - a vast nothingness. Our universe may only provide clues so vague, we may never come close to understanding the reality from which it sprang. Understanding reality may be far more difficult than an innate blind person accurately imagining what all the colors of the spectrum look like.
I used to use the word “infinite” when I meant “eternal” in describing an existence that never begins or ends. The energy of reality, or reality itself, is eternal. It was, is, and always will be there, in other words. To say reality’s energy is “infinite” may be a mistake. If energy can’t be created or destroyed, the energy of reality (all that exists) has a finite value, in that sense. We aren’t close to having a grip on reality’s properties. We can’t determine much of what’s infinite or finite about it.
add as many universes together as you want, no matter how many and of what variety they are composed, you never reach an infinite amount of them. a set of limits is as much a limit as any.
a possible loophole could be that one of the universes is itself infinite made only of infinite sets. this though would not be infinity proper, infinite sets are unlimited in the context that they can keep building but they cannot be said to represent infinity proper.
if i am incorrect in my ‘beleif’ that ‘infinity is incomparative’ and hence cannot be divided into such sets [if they are truly infinite?], then such a universe would necessarily extend to all reaches thus not allowing for anything other than it. so we would then not exist in this universe as it and all other possible universes could not exist.
interesting; how?
apparently energy is self contained and did not have a beginning, it kinda loops or warps within itself. this i suppose is a kind of eternal but poses problems. thus in physics one doesn’t tend to look for a beginning as time began with the big bang [not that i am a physicist].
what else can a real infinity be? unless we say that reality doesn’t have infinity in it, then we are left with a universe which has edges and is purely finite. this itself leave only the possibility for an infinity beyond it. either way infinity must exist, indeed we may ask if infinity is the most important nature/aspect of reality, the universe is secondary to that, we only put it first because it is our most obvious reality.
lols, yes. can we though, say that it is a fraction of reality, not the whole of it? dimensions are a little tricky; momentum can be considered as a dimension, is this merely a description where we have no other?
indeed! as for nothingness, well it depends on our definition; infinity is nothing, in that it is not a thing, it has no distinguishing qualities [if it did they would bind it] to wit we would conclude this is a thing. on the other hand as it is boundless may we not ask; must it be everything? a paradox for sure, a contradiction ~ well we could at the least have infinite potential. hmm in another way we could look at it like polarities; positive and negative are resolved in the neutral, so in a sense the neutral has the properties of both within it although we can only truly call it neutral. by extension may we say that infinity can hold all things within it yet not be described by any of them, nor said to be any of them.
wow that post got my brain working overtime! why didn’t i find this forum earlier.
realunoriginal, hi
except when something arrives. true though if left alone it cannot end as it does not begin.
it may not ~ it is unlimited.
yes. except where a thing is related to or connected to infinity.
I find it very difficult to get a handle on infinity. What within reality is infinite? What within the known universe (which is an unknown fraction of reality) is infinite? We can only imagine. And as physicists make discovery after discovery in the known microcosm and macrocosm, they keep running into limit after limit. There perhaps is a limit to how small a particle can be or how much a universe can expand.
If the total value of all the energy within reality has always been constant and will remain so for an eternity, its value must be defined as finite. The laws of physics are finite, as far as we have been able to determine. There may be a limit to the number of forms in which energy can exist. Matter is one form; light is another. There may be a fixed number of dimensions within reality or a limit to how many dimensions can be achieved. All these things are finite, but we can’t conclude that any of them apply to a reality beyond our universe - if there’s more to reality than we realize.
I give reality, which is all that is or all the energy that exists, a finite value because we are told by every mainstream physicist that energy just doesn’t spring from a hypothetical absolute void, which theoretically contains no energy or anything beyond complete nothingness. I can’t imagine a complete void. Space may appear to have vast areas of emptiness, but it doesn’t. This Fermilab article touches on the subject. http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/matter/index.html
It’s so difficult for my severely limited human intellect to fathom a reality (or fixed amount of energy) that is eternal (not to be confused with term “infinite”), but how can it be otherwise? How can all the energy in existence have emerged from a complete void? How can all this energy, which obviously exists, increase or decrease in value? We know that it switches roles, but apparently loses not one minute speck of value - no matter how many transformations it undergoes. In other words, to the best of our knowledge, energy eternally interacts and makes countless trades for different properties that are always of equal value. Everything is always in complete balance, no matter how violent an interaction. The Big Bang comes to mind.
It is so difficult for beings that have a birth and death, that depend on space-time to experience everything, to comprehend a part of reality that has always been and will always be at least immune to time. Is it possible for energy to interact in a dimension without space-time? Is there such a dimension? Can time exist without space? How can anything do anything without space-time as we know it? These are perplexing questions. Perhaps a small or large fraction of reality is under the influence of something more sophisticated than the simple space-time we are experiencing.
Eternity is a measure of time. An infinite amount of time. Just another word for infinity but with a different undertone. Infinity represents everything that has existed, exists, or doesn’t exist, including all possible realities and sub-realities and super-realities and different variations ad infinitum.
Does infinity itself end then? I guess not.
If you ask me, religions are just spin-offs of infinity itself designed to make people submit in fear.
If I remember correctly, the law of conservation actually says that the amount of energy destroyed will be replaced by an energy of an equivalent amount. But in schools they teach that it says energy cannot be destroyed, because the law is much easier to teach when explained this way. Sadly, the latter formulation has given rise to many new age notions that are actually incompatible with modern science, such as that consciousness is this energy, so we must all be immortal. I see they still plague philosophy forums.
reality itself as a whole. how else can we define reality ~ all of our definitions relate to reality in its parts but none do or can explain reality as entire!
can finite = eternity? my answer is not alone, but maybe as you infer we should look beyond these definitions. my grande theory is thus; you take a sheet of paper upon which you place a point. everything in the universe including the universe itself are points and relationships between them, the paper is infinity. so ‘energy’ whatever that is, can take a multitude of finite forms yet shall always remain. so we have an eternity expressed in finite forms.
…there must be a factor by which energy itself is outside of its forms? here then energy is infinite but of ‘0’ value perhaps? the only way i can piece it together is if we say that ‘infinity tries to be itself’. so it tries to become everything but cannot do so all at once and time is the product of this. its primal form is the infinitesimal [a point], it must then find a way to get form this to everything else, so it keeps producing points indeed tries to produce an infinite amount of them. now as soon as it produces a second point we have not only the two points but a ‘relationship’ between them. that relationship is relativistic time + nuclear forces, gravity momentum and everything else are expressions of this principle. there is one ‘universal entity’ that when acted on becomes forces, the body of points produces ‘gravity’ just as if you drive fast you produce momentum [yet that energy did not exist until you drove].
…to cut a long story short each incarnation of energy ~ a universe, must ‘die’ then arise once more like the phoenix from the flame. that is the only way that things can continue without hitting infinity paradoxes. of couse we now go back to square one and ask; what is that state? i.e. when everything has ended [even if between universes].
here even the notion of infinity becomes blurred as it too exists relative to other states by comparison. this is why i draw the conclusion that ‘infinity is incomparative’ i.e. infinity when not a state relative to the finite and hence is briefly its own thing. that pure infinity is outside of time and thence ‘exists’ for ever carrying everything over from incarnation to incarnation. i also apply this as an interpretation of personal rebirth, but that is quite another debate eh!
define eternity? i.e. must have infinity as a component or be a component thereof. i agree that nothingness itself is a figment of our imaginations, infinity is not, it is used in maths quite a lot.
ponty hi
yes, that fits in nicely with my theory.
of course they do! the question has not yet been fully answered e.g. you can dissect the human brain and find a load of chemicals and electricity, yet you will not find the quality of ‘mind’.
secondly, we don’t know what universal reality is, it may be that mind has a base form that is infinite or is infinity itself ~ it all depends on our definitions.
i may be wrong so i try to understand things in a duel perspective including either neither and both options in a given dichotomous perspective.
](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/uploads/default/original/2X/7/7c349bf1053f368a5729d053e1e91215f22ce66c.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
