Can eternity end?

[my_serpentin]

this thread is essentially a simpler version of the issue of my first thread:

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?p=240022#post240022

 

This is not a duplicate. It vastly simpler for the purpose of obtaining satisfaction of the primary question i want to understand better. If you have spinoff type info/ideas about other components of the question, please put those in the first thread. This thread has one question only.

 

Can eternity end? Can something which has always been, suddenly degenerate into non-existence? If the universe has in some form always existed, is it logical that it would ever arrive at absolute death? Infinite regression, moving TOWARDS a static state, does sound reasonable. However would it ever arrive at such a state? Please provide evidence for your view.

[insane_alien]

by definition eternity is never ending so no. this more of a philosophical question

[aguy2]

 

Can eternity end?

 

To my mind words like 'eternity' and 'endless' are intrinsically bogus and self-undefining. 'Endless eternity' of necessity would be an ongoing process and by definition there is know way of knowing that the process will never end.

 

Besides eternal existence would imply that something has existed for an infinite amount of time into past, plus an infinite amount of time into the future, which amounts to 2 x infinity which is by definition an impossibility.

 

The surface of things like spheres might not have an end per se, but any process like traveling on that surface might stop at any time. To my mind the only definition of 'eternity' that could make any sense would be something like "existence without benefit of time" or "existence in a situation where time did not exist".

 

aguy2

[Connor]

Besides eternal existence would imply that something has existed for an infinite amount of time into past' date=' plus an infinite amount of time into the future, which amounts to 2 x infinity which is by definition an impossibility.

aguy2[/quote']

 

 

2x infinity is surely possible. For example, there are an infinite amount of rational numbers between 1 & 2, and an infinite amount of numbers between 2 & 3. It's just another order of infinity.

 

Can eternity end? Can something which has always been' date=' suddenly degenerate into non-existence? If the universe has in some form always existed, is it logical that it would ever arrive at absolute death? Infinite regression, moving TOWARDS a static state, does sound reasonable. However would it ever arrive at such a state? Please provide evidence for your view.[/quote']

 

If by eternity you mean our universe, I see absolutely no reason why it shouldn't end. I don't see any reason why it should end, because a state of maximum entropy isn't really an end, but I also don't see any reason why the possibility of an end should be impossible

 

The universe may or may not have an ultimate beginning. Nobody knows, and perhaps nobody will. If it did not have an ultimate beginning, I still see no reason why there should be no end. Our universe is a strange and wondrous place, and we really don't understand very much at all. It is pretentious to think we have an influence on the universe, or even know its fate. Perhaps it will go on forever, perhaps it will just disappear one day for absolutely no reason (that we know of). If that happens, it's unfortunate we will all die, because it would be interesting to see what happens.

 

ps: I like your picture, serpentin

[[Tycho?]]

2x infinity is surely possible. For example' date=' there are an infinite amount of rational numbers between 1 & 2, and an infinite amount of numbers between 2 & 3. It's just another order of infinity.

[/quote']

 

Uh, you can't have 2x infinity. Well you can, but the result is just the same infinity as you started out with.

[Connor]

yeah, that's what I was trying to say. Infinity isn't a number, it just means something goes on forever. So infinity+infinity=infinity, so it would be possible to have infinite time in the future and in the past.

[J.C.MacSwell]

']Uh, you can't have 2x infinity[/b']. Well you can, but the result is just the same infinity as you started out with.

 

You can. And it's meaningful. For instance if you had an infinite number of planets spread evenly through infinite space and you doubled the infinite planets but not the infinite space you would have doubled the planet density per volume of space.

[J.C.MacSwell]

this thread is essentially a simpler version of the issue of my first thread:

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?p=240022#post240022

 

This is not a duplicate. It vastly simpler for the purpose of obtaining satisfaction of the primary question i want to understand better. If you have spinoff type info/ideas about other components of the question' date=' please put those in the first thread. This thread has one question only.

 

Can eternity end? Can something [b']which has always been[/b], suddenly degenerate into non-existence? If the universe has in some form always existed, is it logical that it would ever arrive at absolute death? Infinite regression, moving TOWARDS a static state, does sound reasonable. However would it ever arrive at such a state? Please provide evidence for your view.

 

Just a question. If it has always been then how could we possibly have reached "now"? Another way of looking at this is; if an infinite amount of time had to flow prior to you being born...

 

On the other hand it is easier to imagine a "position" in infinite Euclidean space so if you "see" time the same way then no problem. Just thoughts.

[my_serpentin]

i think some of you are getting a little hung up on the title, which was mainly an attention grabber. Its not a philosophical question, i'm just asking if it is logically possible for something which had no beginning to ever ABSOLUTELY end. i know you said there is no reason to assume that the universe has existed forever, but for the context of this question we are assuming so, place comments about the beginning in thread as linked in my first post.

 

Keep in mind i am meaning total absolute end, not relative end. It also might make things clearer to redifine the question as to can EXISTENCE itself end. Our universe is not necisarily the only universe, obviously not really a way to test that, but if so, our universe could have a relative beginning when it was created, but there was existence before this point so it is not a true beginning. The same rationale would apply to the end. If our universe does itself somehow have an ABSOLUTE end, but there are other things in existence, this is not a true end.

 

************ SO: assuming our universe is the only unit of existence, it is the most logical conclusion that it had no beginning. Being the only unit of existence, a beginning equates to ABSOLUTELY something coming out of ABSOLUTELY nothing, which is illogical. (If you dispute this portion of the equation, discuss it in the other thread).

 

THEN if the universe (defined as the only and complete unit of existence) has always existed, is it logically possible for this cycle to come to a ABSOLUTE stop and end.

 

ps conner, thanks for the avatar comps, i've become quite the manson junkie as of late

[sunspot]

One possible way to answer this question is to define eternity using special relativity. In other words, if one traveled at C, time reference would become eternal with respect any inertial reference. As such, all one needs to do is slow down from C and time becomes less than eternal. In that respect, matter helps makes eternity finite. If all matter goes back to C or energy, eternity will be restored. In our universe, we have both matter and energy such that both eternal and finite reference exist side-by-side. I do not believe there will ever be only mass in a universe without energy for eternity to completely end.

[Connor]

I understand your argument that logically, how could something cease to exist? I personally do not believe the universe can or will end, but that is just speculation. My point is that the universe may not act in the logical way we think it does, and we cannot really apply our rules to it.

[mattd]

Yeah, this is in the wrong forum. I guess it depends on the point of view of whomever you're talking about.

[aguy2]

On the other hand it is easier to imagine a "position" in infinite Euclidean space so if you "see" time the same way then no problem. Just thoughts.

 

Just Thoughts: If one was to see time as endless as a 3d sphere is, and one traveled endlessly on this sphere, might one not traverse a point on that sphere from an infinite numbers of angles? Carried to an extreme might it not be possible that of the 150k+ participants at Gettysburgs, Pa. in 1863 one might be all of them?

 

aguy2

[aguy2]

The critics of this thread are probabily right in that this thread is in the wrong forum, but nonetheless;

 

If our universe does itself somehow have an ABSOLUTE end' date=' but there are other things in existence, this is not a true end.

[/quote']

 

What if the universe became 'never was'? In other words not only did it become non-existent, its past also became non-existent.

 

aguy2

[Connor]

that's an interesting thought - a universe that is not cyclic but repetitive, repeating its history over and over. I don't know though, seems like random chance would create an entirely new universe every time through

[aguy2]

that's an interesting thought - a universe that is not cyclic but repetitive, repeating its history over and over. I don't know though, seems like random chance would create an entirely new universe every time through

 

Determinists might disagree, but you are probabily right.

 

aguy2

[my_serpentin]

i dont think its in the wrong forum. The universe is realm of PHYSICS, and since we cant experiment all we have to work with are speculations and THEORIES. We are also doing these things in modern time :: walaa <<Modern/Theoretical Physics>>

 

I suppose becoming non/never-been-existent would effectively be such an end we inquire of, however it seems achieving such a fate would require external intervention, unless you have theories about the method of such an operation could occur

[labfreek]

I really don't think that every thing can last forever, not even the world will be here till the year 16000. I hope this helps.

[bjmyanks]

yeah, that's what I was trying to say. Infinity isn't a number, it just means something goes on forever. So infinity+infinity=infinity, so it would be possible to have infinite time in the future and in the past.

Then what is infinity-infinity?

[gcol]

by definition eternity is never ending so no. this more of a philosophical question

 

To move it from philosophy to science, and science being not worth a bean if it does not use exact terms and definitions that we can agree on, Why not types of eternity? Wait, no, I think I am serious! (possibly)

 

1. How about, for the thread originator, the Serpentin eternity.

 

2. Spherical eternities ( for giddy ants going around balls).

 

3. cyclical eternities, for repeating universes, etc.

 

And if you still want eternity to be less than infinite, and therefore grammatically incorrect, how about an infinity of eternities. Just choose one, and we'll know which thread it belongs to.

[yammers]

Then what is infinity-infinity?

 

I think the best way to think of infinity is Zero, because numbers are in a way, bound to rules and have limits. Numbers may seem to go on forever, but in a finite manner. Zero on the other hand is infinitely nothing.

 

Eternity will not end, it will just have a different alias.

[Connor]

infinity-infinity depends on the infinities. It's not that simple

[aguy2]

I suppose becoming non/never-been-existent would effectively be such an end we inquire of' date=' however it seems achieving such a fate would require external intervention, unless you have theories about the method of such an operation could occur[/quote']

 

If we could ever find ways to bring something into existence whose components have never existed, it might prove possible to reverse the process, but it would probably not be a good idea to hold your breath till either condition were met.

 

aguy2

[Helix]

You can. And it's meaningful. For instance if you had an infinite number of planets spread evenly through infinite space and you doubled the infinite planets but not the infinite space you would have doubled the planet density per volume of space.

 

Actually, 2xinfinity planets through infinite space would still yield the same results because of the infinite space part. Space goes on forever and so do the evenly spaced planets. So you can't double either, doubling implies you have an end from which to double (i.e. 1+1=2. 1.345334565436878....+1 = you don't know because the answer is varible on what lies after the last digit).

[Connor]

no, the density will indeed be double. This is a very important aspect, although it can sometimes be hard to grasp.

 

Imagine there are an infinite # of red and blue marbles, and a 2/3 chance of getting a red marble by randomly sampling this population. This means there are twice as many red as blue marbles, but there are infinite of both.