Paradox

[OroborosEmber]

On 4/7/2017 at 7:23 AM, AbnormallyHonest said:

I'm not sure, I guess it depends. Do you think that the value of "0" is a form of infinity?

in a moment of clairvoyance noticed the "space" between 0&1 differed from spaces between 1&2,2&3,3&4 and so forth. I immediately thought 0 implies infinity, 0 doesn't make sense. This was in my head, I can't explain what I mean by spaces, nor is valid evidence.

However, I read a book dealing with complementarity mainly concerning quantum mechanics, but it also briefly touched on other subjects. It said 0 and infinity are mathematical complementarities for the reason

0÷n=0 but n÷0=infinity

So yes, I do believe 0 is a "form" of infinity. And so did Menas Kafatos & Robert Nadeau as they cited it in their The Conscious Universe.

[Strange]

3 hours ago, OroborosEmber said:

in a moment of clairvoyance noticed the "space" between 0&1 differed from spaces between 1&2,2&3,3&4 and so forth. I immediately thought 0 implies infinity, 0 doesn't make sense. This was in my head, I can't explain what I mean by spaces, nor is valid evidence.

So you imagined a difference between something you can't explain and something else you can't explain? Why should anyone take such nonsense seriously?

On the other hand, mathematics shows us that there are an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1 and between 1 and 2. These infinities are the same "size" (but larger than the infinite number of integers).

3 hours ago, OroborosEmber said:

However, I read a book dealing with complementarity mainly concerning quantum mechanics, but it also briefly touched on other subjects. It said 0 and infinity are mathematical complementarities for the reason

0÷n=0 but n÷0=infinity

That isn't true. (So I would be cautious about everything else in that book).

[OroborosEmber]

8 hours ago, Strange said:

So you imagined a difference between something you can't explain and something else you can't explain? Why should anyone take such nonsense seriously?

On the other hand, mathematics shows us that there are an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1 and between 1 and 2. These infinities are the same "size" (but larger than the infinite number of integers).

That isn't true. (So I would be cautious about everything else in that book).

I didn't expect you to take it seriously.

Just a abnormal answer to the question from Abnormallyhonest.

I appreciate your mathematical explanation. 

The book was copyrighted in the 90's, as were most of the books I gained my limited scientific insight from. Now that I have internet as a resource I'm overwhelmed by my lack of knowledge. Mathematics is perhaps the best starting point for true understanding.

[1x0]

On 2017. 04. 06. at 5:57 PM, AbnormallyHonest said:

Infinity is at the root of all paradox.

It is a paradox if the system is finite. If not then it is the not yet clearly understood truth.

On 2017. 04. 06. at 7:18 PM, Strange said:

Except for the ones where it isn't. Which is paradoxical, really.

Physical infinity and finite cannot exist in the same system.

Ether it is finite or infinite but how could one system be both?

Maybe that is why it is paradoxical since we always have a concept of a possible truth which cannot be true (and here does not really matter that infinity or finite is that) 

Edited February 10, 2018 by 1x0

[1x0]

4 hours ago, 1x0 said:

It is not easy to perceive this concept... Infinitely larger than infinity.....while there is no sign of general physical infinity. 

 

Maybe this is a paradox? 

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

OT tangents have been split 

Infinity

Continuity of space

Other people's threads are not an invitation to ask tangential questions or impose you own pet theory on the discussion.