Zero probability- further proof that nothing exists

[Qoeleth]

Let’s consider a non-crystalline substance, like glass. It is clear that a piece of glass could have an infinite number of possible shapes and sizes. Now, the probability of the existence of any given shape and size in a piece of glass is therefore:
1/Infinity= 0

Thus any given piece of glass has, literally, a zero probability.

Now, events and beings also evidently share the infinite possibility of variants, and, by the same reasoning, all things have a zero probability (1/Infinity), and are therefore not possible.

Therefore, nothing exists.

 

[Alberti_Devoveo]

Let’s consider a non-crystalline substance, like glass. It is clear that a piece of glass could have an infinite number of possible shapes and sizes. Now, the probability of the existence of any given shape and size in a piece of glass is therefore:
1/Infinity= 0

Thus any given piece of glass has, literally, a zero probability.

Now, events and beings also evidently share the infinite possibility of variants, and, by the same reasoning, all things have a zero probability (1/Infinity), and are therefore not possible.

Therefore, nothing exists.

You cannot make a piece of glass the size of the solar system. Thus the number of sizes is not infinite. Since size is not infinite, then the probability is not 1 / infinity, thus things do exist.

You could also see your error by opening a cabinet and looking at the glassware. Since it is there because it was designed and made, then clearly things exist.

 

[AndrewAugustine]

1. You can not divide a number by “infinity”.
2. Also, our world is not an infinite continuum. Try to read about quantum space.
3. You seem to define “exist” as “to have a shape”. There are things like hope, love, and gravity, that don’t have a shape, but definitely exist.

 

[empther]

like the other posters said, many holes in the OP’s argument.

Furthermore,
the chances of a piece of glass being a particular size and shape is 100% certain if other things make it so,
just as the other things were 100% certain by the things that made them,
and so forth back to the beginning.

I don’t know why you spend so much time dreaming up these strange ideas, Ooeleth. It takes only seconds to see the refutations.

 

[ReapReason]

If I made this argument, my face would be bright red, like a sun that’s turned in to a red giant.

 

[Qoeleth]

You cannot make a piece of glass the size of the solar system. Thus the number of sizes is not infinite. Since size is not infinite, then the probability is not 1 / infinity, thus things do exist.

You could also see your error by opening a cabinet and looking at the glassware. Since it is there because it was designed and made, then clearly things exist.

Well, if I saw something which my reason told me had a zero (or approaching zero) probability (like a unicorn riding a unicycle), I would then conclude that my senses deceived me. Applying the same principle, since each piece of glass is dictated by reason as having a zero probability, it would seem to make sense to conclude that my senses are deceiving me about that too. And about all things.

 

[runningdude]

Let’s consider a non-crystalline substance, like glass. It is clear that a piece of glass could have an infinite number of possible shapes and sizes. Now, the probability of the existence of any given shape and size in a piece of glass is therefore:
1/Infinity= 0

Thus any given piece of glass has, literally, a zero probability.

Now, events and beings also evidently share the infinite possibility of variants, and, by the same reasoning, all things have a zero probability (1/Infinity), and are therefore not possible.

Therefore, nothing exists.

The “probability” of glass having any particular shape is zero, by your logic. However, the probability of a piece of glass having any possible shape is exactly one.

The of union of all possible shapes divided by the domain of all possible shapes equals one. Therefore, the glass has a shape.

 

[Zosimus41]

1. You can not divide a number by “infinity”.
2. Also, our world is not an infinite continuum. Try to read about quantum space.
3. You seem to define “exist” as “to have a shape”. There are things like hope, love, and gravity, that don’t have a shape, but definitely exist.

A mathmatical aproach i.e. the mandelbrot set does show us infinity in creation if one believes a mathematical approach to knowledge that can lead us to a fundamental theory of everything.

Have some fun zoom in for an eternity!

cs.princeton.edu/~wayne/mandel/mandel.html

 

[MarkThompson]

Let’s consider a non-crystalline substance, like glass. It is clear that a piece of glass could have an infinite number of possible shapes and sizes. Now, the probability of the existence of any given shape and size in a piece of glass is therefore:
1/Infinity= 0

Thus any given piece of glass has, literally, a zero probability.

Now, events and beings also evidently share the infinite possibility of variants, and, by the same reasoning, all things have a zero probability (1/Infinity), and are therefore not possible.

Therefore, nothing exists.

One might equivalently imagine the following exchange:
Tom: Hey Suzy, did you know I’m a mind reader? Sure, well, I’d like to try a parlor game with you. Here’s a slip of paper; write down a number on it, any number at all, only don’t show it to me. I’ll see if I can tell you what number you’re thinking of.

Suzy: Okay, let’s find out if your powers are for real! <>

Tom: All right. Well, since there are infinitely many numbers, the chance of your number being any given number is 1/infinity, which is zero. Thus, you could not have written down any number! The paper is blank!

Suzy: <> Nope, it was 42!

Tom: Zounds! Where did I go wrong?
If you can figure out where Tom went wrong, then you will also understand where you are going wrong.

 

[ReapReason]

A mathmatical aproach i.e. the mandelbrot set does show us infinity in creation if one believes a mathematical approach to knowledge that can lead us to a fundamental theory of everything.

Have some fun zoom in for an eternity!

cs.princeton.edu/~wayne/mandel/mandel.html

But applied mathematics in respect of the universe deals with real quantities. It presupposes metaphysical concepts of reality. You cannot use mathematics to define a true metaphysical nothing.

 

[Zosimus41]

But applied mathematics in respect of the universe deals with real quantities. It presupposes metaphysical concepts of reality. You cannot use mathematics to define a true metaphysical nothing.

So in leymans terms your saying you cant use math to describe the absence of matter?
i.e. in the begining God created etc… You cant have 2 with out 1 plus 1 already in existence?

Im just trying to understand your point.

 

[ReapReason]

So in leymans terms your saying you cant use math to describe the absence of matter?
i.e. in the begining God created etc… You cant have 2 with out 1 plus 1 already in existence?

Im just trying to understand your point.

You can say 2 - 2 = 0; and so you can negate quantity in so far as we understand zero to mean the absence of some kind of quantity. But you cannot describe an actual quantity as being as equal to the metaphysical concept of absolutely nothing. Nothing is not a quantity or a thing; but rather it is the negation of some possible quantity.

You cannot have a true objective irreducible object that has the quantity of -1, for example. It is simply one object.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

Well, if I saw something which my reason told me had a zero (or approaching zero) probability (like a unicorn riding a unicycle), I would then conclude that my senses deceived me. Applying the same principle, since each piece of glass is dictated by reason as having a zero probability, it would seem to make sense to conclude that my senses are deceiving me about that too. And about all things.

Except something which does not exist (your sensory organs) could not possibly deceive you. Therefore you cannot be being deceived into thinking things exist if they don’t. Since if they don’t exist, you must be being deceived (an impossibility) then things must necessarily exist.

But your original argument fails for any number of reasons, including the fact that you are assuming without reason that all outcomes (potential shapes) are equally probable, and assuming an infinite number of possible shapes without having proven that that is actually the case.

 

[Alberti_Devoveo]

Well, if I saw something which my reason told me had a zero (or approaching zero) probability (like a unicorn riding a unicycle), I would then conclude that my senses deceived me. Applying the same principle, since each piece of glass is dictated by reason as having a zero probability, it would seem to make sense to conclude that my senses are deceiving me about that too. And about all things.

Then you are rejecting common senses for complete illogic.

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

If we assume determinism for a moment, then it doesn’t matter how many possible shapes something has. There will always be exactly 1 possible outcome of events (i.e. shaping some glass.) Everything would be fixed by choosing some initial conditions. Are there infinitely many possible starting conditions? Perhaps, but we must also the case where every possible starting condition exists.

 

[TimothyH]

Let’s consider a non-crystalline substance, like glass. It is clear that a piece of glass could have an infinite number of possible shapes and sizes. Now, the probability of the existence of any given shape and size in a piece of glass is therefore:
1/Infinity= 0

Thus any given piece of glass has, literally, a zero probability.

Now, events and beings also evidently share the infinite possibility of variants, and, by the same reasoning, all things have a zero probability (1/Infinity), and are therefore not possible.

Therefore, nothing exists.

What if I throw rocks at the windshield of your ZR1 Corvette. Does glass then still not exist?

This has been my yearly contribution to the Philosophy forum. Thank you.

-Tim-

 

[J_Peterson]

If you put every real number between 0 and 1 in a bag, each number would have a 0 probability of being picked. Problem is, in this thought experiment, you can pick one so the probablity can’t be 0. My probability theory is very rusty but once you enter into infinite sets you need to start using calculus to determine the probabilites.

Also, as has been pointed out, the universe is finite and can’t contain an actual infinity.

 

[edwest2]

Let’s consider a non-crystalline substance, like glass. It is clear that a piece of glass could have an infinite number of possible shapes and sizes. Now, the probability of the existence of any given shape and size in a piece of glass is therefore:
1/Infinity= 0

Thus any given piece of glass has, literally, a zero probability.

Now, events and beings also evidently share the infinite possibility of variants, and, by the same reasoning, all things have a zero probability (1/Infinity), and are therefore not possible.

Therefore, nothing exists.

– Looks at stack of bills. That’s great news. They don’t exist!

Peace,
Ed

 

[laircy]

Doesn’t this only prove that a number needs to be CHOSEN by someone for it to picked from an infinity at all? Have a “bag” of an infinite amount of numbers, let it sit there and nothing happens; 0. Someone or something must pick a number out to change that. Well I think that gets rid of the theory that the laws of physics just “existed” and that’s why we have a universe, as it was stated by scientists on some other news thread. Someone would have to decide what the laws were.

So yes, I think you’re halfway right. Either nothing exists because of zero probability, or we exist and God exists.

 

[hcostell]

I cannot cross the room. First, I must walk half the distance, then half the remaining distance, then half the remaining distance,… so I can never entirely cross the room. Yet I DO cross the room and out the door.
You and I were created by God, to love and serve him.