Is there life in outer space?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_II
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Note as well. In terms of Falsifiablity. It is simply understood that because science can not proove or disprove a theory, does not equate to nonexistence of the theory’s asserted concept.

Currently our science can not be applied to the theory in any definitive manner as you seem to indicate.

How would we know if we ever reached the end of infinity?** Is** there such a thing as zero? How could we even observe absolute zero?

Hence the concept (infinity in this case) is not to be dismissed.
 
Since one can not dismiss the concept of inifinity then perhaps the issue of Physical Infinity should then be addressed.

What we have to date on this issue IMHO is inconclusive. Our science is severely limited to the observable as we understand it only with the tools we have to observe such.

And there is the rub.:cool:

Ergo the theory of infinity is still open to question and therefore not to be dismissed.

Those who wish to continue to go down this rabbit hole are free to do so. (Perhaps start a new Thread so we can * ahem* return to the OP topic?) Not me. I am going to actually live my life.😉

I reiterate. good Luck!

Nuff said.😃
 
Nimzovik said:
Note as well. In terms of Falsifiablity. It is simply understood that because science can not proove or disprove a theory, does not equate to nonexistence of the theory’s asserted concept.
Click to expand...
True, but it does make the theory not science.
Nimzovik said:
Currently our science can not be applied to the theory in any definitive manner as you seem to indicate.
Click to expand...
By its own axioms, multiverse theory can never be proven.
Nimzovik said:
How would we know if we ever reached the end of infinity?** Is** there such a thing as zero? How could we even observe absolute zero?
Click to expand...
If you “reach the end” of infinity, then you do not have infinity.

I have zero apples in my hand. I can definitely observe the no apples in my hand.
Nimzovik said:
Hence the concept (infinity in this case) is not to be dismissed.
Click to expand...
Again, I already stated that the concept is fine, what I have argued (from the beginning of the current discussion) is that a physical (i.e., actual) infinity is not possible.
 
Nimzovik said:
Since one can not dismiss the concept of inifinity then perhaps the issue of Physical Infinity should then be addressed.
Click to expand...
Well, it is what I started with…
Nimzovik said:
What we have to date on this issue IMHO is inconclusive. Our science is severely limited to the observable as we understand it only with the tools we have to observe such.
Click to expand...
In order to measure something, we have to be able to contain it in some manner. Since infinity is unbounded (by definition), we cannot measure it because we cannot contain it.
Nimzovik said:
And there is the rub.:cool:

Ergo the theory of infinity is still open to question and therefore not to be dismissed.
Click to expand...
There is no “theory of infinity.” Infinity is a mathematical construct.
 
Perhaps Big Bang then Big Crunch. How many times? Infinite?
see here: universetoday.com/37018/big-crunch/

Perhaps the Big Crunch is out of --ahem – currently out of Scientific Fashion. But then we have to discuss into what the ever expanding universe is expanding* into* - yes?

There are numerous concepts similar to as discribed above that could be presented as well.

As I assert. The question is simply **not **closed. Period.

As I said earlier. I for one am not going there.

You can enjoy yourself however. Take all the time you like. Take an infinite amount of time!😃
 
Alberti_Devoveo
Wrote:

“There is no “theory of infinity.” Infinity is a mathematical construct.”

**Nimzovik Responds: **

Really? You just said** that??? :rolleyes:**

Oh brother.

A retreat into semiotics /semantics eh? Arbitrary classifications set by the close minded?
 
Nimzovik said:
Alberti_Devoveo
Wrote:

“There is no “theory of infinity.” Infinity is a mathematical construct.”

**Nimzovik Responds: **

Really? You just said** that??? :rolleyes:**

Oh brother.

A retreat into semiotics /semantics eh?
Click to expand...
Well you have misread my initial post about infinity, so I figured I ought to be as clear about everything as I can.
 
Aloysium said:
a model that was much favoured in the past was that of time-space being represented by a sphere where the north and south poles represented the big bang and big crunch and the latitudes corresponded to the size of the universe at any particular time
it went along with the idea that if you shot a photon out into space it would eventually hit you in the back of the head
it was very neat and easy to grasp with one’s mind
unfortunately recent data did not go along with it
my mind continues to be boggled
Click to expand...
Mine too.
 
Nimzovik said:
Perhaps Big Bang then Big Crunch. How many times? Infinite?
see here: universetoday.com/37018/big-crunch/

Perhaps the Big Crunch is out of --ahem – currently out of Scientific Fashion. But then we have to discuss into what the ever expanding universe is expanding* into* - yes?
Click to expand...
Fr Spitzer delves into this in his book New Proofs…; he states that it cannot be an infinite cycle of Bangs and Crunches due to the starlight-to-CMB-radiation ratio. Further, our universe is accelerating in its expansion, so it is unlikely that a Big Crunch could have occurred once, let alone multiple times.
Nimzovik said:
There are numerous concepts as discribed above that could be presented as well.
Click to expand...
Not sure which concepts you are referring to where…
Nimzovik said:
As I assert. The question is simply **not **closed. Period.
Click to expand...
A conceptual infinity (i.e., a mathematical construct) is surely closed. The physical infinity ought to be closed, but you keep failing to grasp Peano’s axioms.
 
Infinity is described by Miriam Webster Dictionary

So there is various meaning for the word infinity …
infinity
Click to expand...
  1. The quality or condition of being infinite.
  2. Unbounded space, time, or quantity.
  3. An indefinitely large number or amount.
  4. Mathematics The limit that a function is said to approach at x = a when (x) is larger than any preassigned number for all x sufficiently near a.
a. A range in relation to an optical system, such as a camera lens, representing distances great enough that light rays reflected from objects within the range may be regarded as parallel.
b. A distance setting, as on a camera, beyond which the entire field is in focus.
Click to expand...
 
Alberti_Devoveo said:
Fr Spitzer delves into this in his book New Proofs…; he states that it cannot be an infinite cycle of Bangs and Crunches due to the starlight-to-CMB-radiation ratio. Further, our universe is accelerating in its expansion, so it is unlikely that a Big Crunch could have occurred once, let alone multiple times.

Not sure which concepts you are referring to where…

A conceptual infinity (i.e., a mathematical construct) is surely closed. The physical infinity ought to be closed, but you keep failing to grasp Peano’s axioms.
Click to expand...
Indeed?

I would continue this debate, however the thread has been hijacked enuff already.
 
WEIRD SCIENCE !!!

and people are debating intelligent life in outer space, how about String Theory !???

If you are easily miffed at the idea of life existing else where in the universe check out String Theory and become more aggrivated.
 
john78 said:
WEIRD SCIENCE !!!

and people are debating intelligent life in outer space, how about String Theory !???

If you are easily miffed at the idea of life existing else where in the universe check out String Theory and become more aggrivated.
Click to expand...
I couldn’t care less about either, really.

I just like to rattle the chains of those who are dogmatic either way.

ICXC NIKA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top