Thoughts? Share.

hmmm....an interesting notion indeed.....

well, when you take into account the definition of infinity, i think it is best to also define "linear time" and "circular time".....infinity and circular time are more or less the same thing, although circular time CAN take into account a sort of "reincarnated" effect, whereas "infinity" is just forever and ever, somewhat following a linear progression, but with no end or beginning....

us humans live on a linear time scale (obviously).....not only does time (yrs, months, wks, hours, minutes, etc.) seem to progress forward, but science seems to inform us, via evolution, that time also appears linear....you had the big bang, the formation of stars, galaxies, planets, then a single celled organism, then asexual organsims, then lil' protozoan thingy's, then fishes, then amphibians, dinosaurs, apes, ape-men, man, etc, etc, etc.......

but the ever plaguing question is how could it have all started? there's a term (and i can't for the life of me remember it, and i don't have my book with me at the moment) and it basically says that everything had to have an ancestor....you had to have your parents, they had to have their parents, them theirs, and etc, etc, etc......

now then, how is it existence came to be? what could have started it....but more importantly, how did that "necessary being" (God, goddesses, the "big bang," that which was first) come to be?

if there exists this "necessary being" then evidently, even it wasn't what was first....for, the notion of "motion" would have to predate this "necessary being".....if i may use a rough analogy.....think about wakin' up and seein' your room (think of sight in this aspect as the necessary being), but itz the motion of your eye-lids opening that predates your sight......

so the term infinity was thrown out there as a way around this puzzling question.....only problem is, is that with infinity you still are stuck with that term of ancestory (you, your parents, their parents, etc) and it doesn't real solve anything....

which is where circular time comes into play.....

even scientists (astrologers) seems to think circular time might be possible.....that whole theory about the big bang, where the universe is expanding, only to contract via a massive black hole, only to explode again, would suggest a form of circular time.....

now, whatz interesting is the theory that space isn't even physical, that space will exist even after this contraction.....i forget his name, but it starts with a P (Paluck...or sumtin' to that effect) had this theory that space existed even before any physical particle.....even calculated how long it was after the big bang that the firt particle surfaced, and it was many, many, many, many years........

so whatz interesting here is that if there was existence prior anything physical, what is it that existed?

obviously, the metaphysical would be applied here.......and this opens up a whole new can of whoop-ass (so to speak) on the theory of time in general....

basically, if you can believe or reason that there is in fact a metaphysical existence as well as a physical existence, and you can believe or reason that the metaphysical existed prior the physical, and if you can believe that the big bang theory and Paluck's theory is correct, and that the universe will one day collapse in on itself, then circular time (infinity) looks to be pretty damn justified.....

but the problem now is what all does circular time entail?

well......if the metaphysical is indeed infinite or circular, and the physical will one day die out, only to be reborn again, what is it thatz reborn?

is it the exact same universe? have we had this conversation already before? or is it slightly altered, but more or less still the same? or is it sumtin' completely different?

in my opinion, i think itz bound to be something either slightly altered or completely different....i think a lot of the same physical properties will exist, but i doubt it will all happen the same way....but it very well could....

but in my opinion, i believe that the metaphysical exists in circular time while the physical exists in linear......but like i said, if after the re-birth itz slightly altered, meaning some of the same physical properties exist, then surely this would suggest the physical as being circular as well.....

but in the end, i do believe in circular time.....

FIrst, let me just start with:

HOLY FUCKING SHIT, Dark Messiah, you're still around? And the rolling panda icon! And the Ovid quote that kept me alive through childhood! *SQUEEEE!* All things change, nothing perishes... too true... *rolls around frothing with glee for a bit, and then gets up, straightens tie, combs back hair, clears throt and continues*

Unlike SIc, I'm just going to babble pseudo-intellectually on the concept of "infinity", instead of concentrating on infinite time or space or whatnot. I figure that infinity transcends human understanding, insofar as we can get the details of it. It's like perfection. People can justify perfection exists because one is confronted with varying degrees of imperfection all the time, so somewhere, there must be perfection. Similarly, the same argument can be taken to "infinity", or the observation that things die, change, and to varying degrees are impermanent, so somewhere, there MUST be something eternal or infinite. I could be confusing infinity with eternity, but generally, I think they all come from the same greek word apeiron which generally is translated as "unlimited".

SO WHAT THE FUCK AM I TALKING ABOUT!? *runs around with arms flailing* How can something have no limits, temporally and spatially, because it seems humans can only measure things around them by fitting them in the boxes of TIME and SPACE... but the very idea that we "measure" things, is what prevents us with a complete mental comprehension of that which is unlimited. It's been argued through the ages that we have to be like fucking God/Prime Mover/Sophia, some Divine Mind that transcends space and time to grasp the infinite.

Since I am just a puny, puny mortal hungover and giving the big Fuck You to Latin class so very early in the morning, on this freezing Groundhog Day, I don't think it's within my capabilities to pontificate anymore on this crazy subject... OR IS IT?

Dun dun dun!!!

I would actually like to seperate infinite from eternity, since the former deals with space and the latter with time. Granted that time and space are intertwined, but the two terms are interchangeable. One of the things that I was wondering was what the real definition of infinity is? If it's simply unending, then the surface of the Earth would have to be considered infinite, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I checked handy Dictionary.Com and it seems that "infinity" is a general term that applies to space, time, and quantity, or just to time. Which is weird. There's also the mathematical aspect of infinity, which I suspect isn't much different. By real definition, do you mean its etymologically roots? Like I mentioned, it stems from the Greek "apeiria/apeiron/apeiros", which means endless or unlimited. The Latin for "apeiron" is "infinitus" (boundless, unlimited), where we get our word for infinity. (For those who don't have basic knowledge of Greek and Latin, this can all be looked up at handy etymonline.com, the etymology dictionary.)

I think you have to take into account the "boundless" part of infinity, and that since the earth has a boundary, then technically it's not infinite.

Depending on how you're going to define it, the surface of the Earth doesn't have any boundaries.

How would we know it exists even if we were staring right at it?

Que?

Well, that's kind of a good point. Infinite can only ever exist as an abstract; it can't be proven.

what makes you say that?

I hate it when you type something and it doesn't enter. Gimpiness, is all I can say.

It can't be proven.
To prove that something is infite you have to travel it, follow it forever, and maybe, just maybe, the creator of the universe built a big brick wall at the end of space, behind which is nothing, a space that cannot be entered.
Any human would have died of old age before it could be proven, so maybe if you sent a robot that was capable of functioning generation after generation, thousands of years.
And then capable of coming back again with the info.

But then if there is infinity he won't come back, and then we'll still think he's going, but maybe he just broke down....oh dear, I'm arguing with myself now.

it can't?

existence is forever.....

itz impossible to have non-existence, for if you have it, then it exists....

also....a circle....granted a human creation, is forever in itz design, as is the sign for infinity......if you trace a circle, never will you be able to break away from the design.....itz forever....

2 + 2 will forever equal 4........granted a human creation, nonetheless forever...

so....is it really impossible to consider time as infinite?

I'm talking about proving the infinity of space and time.

I believe that they both are infinite, but there is no proof of that.

you're "sayin" and not "justifyin'".....

you show me an example of how there can be no proof....justify it.....you tried to justify that there could be no proof of infinity, and i gave you the example of the circle, so tell me how you can't prove infinity when applied to time....

again, i must point out that itz impossible to have non-existence....all there will ever be is existence.....forever, and ever, and ever, and ever.....thus, infinite......

You're 'justifyin' that there can be proof and using a shape to justify it, but that's not the same thing, I'm talking about space, like I said before.
I agree in my first post I didn't specify that enough maybe.

I don't have to justify something that doesn't have proof, that is the job of the proof itself, or the lack of it.

I am talking about literal, scientific proof that space goes on forever, and we just don't have it.

And why does existence have to infinite?
I'm not about to get all Christian and creationist and go on about the beginning, but we know that scientifically there has not always been life as we know it, so if there can be a blank space before the existence of a world that exists today, why can't there be a blank space in time?

There, I've just done what you did with the circle, used an example that proves nothing about the statement of the infinity of existence, so if you think to yourself 'That doesn't prove the lack of infinity of existence', that's how I feel about your circle.

I need more than a circle to convince me that space is infinte, and I disagree with your statement that it's manmade (Look at the sun, we're surrounded by cirlces, giving it a name isn't creating it, second thoughts, don't look at the sun.)

Although I agree time and space are infinte, I can't provide proof either way as it's a belief, not a fact.
We are just little humans, and to think we can make guesses about the infinity of time and space is almost as mad as thinking we know the facts about why we're here and package them up in religion.

yes you do....this is philosophy dear.....the answer is never simple.....justification and abstract thought is the very principle of philosophy.....you prove to me how there is no proof of infinity (whether in space/time or not)......until then, you have no argument....

ah....you just contradicted yourself....it seems you're thinkin' that "existence" is limited merely to the physical.....even you said "science has proved life as we know it wasn't always there" (which woul be physical) "yet BLANK SPACE" ( a metaphysical property) has been there before and after......thus, there is an existence....

do not assume that the "physical" world is the only form of existence.....there is what is known as the "metaphysical" which can best be described as the mind, the soul, dreams, unicorns, mermaids, God, space....etc....

the metaphysical is that which is not physical but still exists......i ask you, does a mermaid exist? you want to say no, for there is no physical proof (empirically there is no proof....empiricism isn't correct....empiricism implies it must be "known/learned" through the senses...but by this definition, the sun is a lil' orange circle in the sky that circles the earth...and the world is flat....both are wrong).....anywho, there is no physical proof of a mermaid....yet, in terms of metaphysics it very well does exist...i say mermaid, and BAM! you immediately have an idea of what i'm talkin' about....doesn't matter if itz a creation of the human imagination, it only matters that itz existence is now and within' your "minds-eye".....to which i ask, is the mind physical? is it the brain? most philosophers don't believe it is, niether do a handful of scientists.....perhaps the mind is "physical" proof of the metaphysical....

anywho....the metaphysical....what a beautiful concept....

thus.....despite physical existence diminishing (see my first post in this thread on page 1 for a more thorough argument) the metaphysical is likely to still exist....even you said it yourself...."space" will exist before and after the universe....

anywho....there's existence....always will be.......doesn't really matter which type, only that there is......to conceive of non-existence is a contradiction in terms....if you have non-existence, then surely that is how it exists.....yes? now you think, when i die, i no longer exist....thatz not true.....you still exist physically, just not the same....so you say, my "mind" doesn't exist....well, religion says you have a soul while science says you have energy while philosophers say you have an essence....all seem to say that yes, you still exist in a metaphysical context even after death.....

anywho....it is impossible to have non-existence.......if there is such a thing, then we would not be here, would not be discussing this, etc......it is impossible, for even if there were non-existence, it would exist as such.....so there is only existence, and being that it can never be non-existent, it is infinite.......space bein' metaphysical, also seems to be infinite.....as it is metaphysical.....and the metaphysical seems to be the only form that can be infinite......

A. a "circle" is a 2-dimensional figure
B. a "circle" is a form of abitrary measurement....as is all which is mathematical
C. the sun isn't a circle...itz a sphere....and it isn't a perfect sphere.....is a ball of gas, which has multiple layers, all of which are different depending on where you are.....some of it extends way out, while some of it doesn't....

ALSO....tid-bit fact about the sun.....the equator spins faster than the poles....isn't that neat?!

first off, don't bring religion into the world of philosophy....it belittles all that philosophy is and hopes to achieve.....there are religious philosophers....they're called theologians

secondly....is it that mad? how so? i think it was Plato who said we'll never know the eternal truth and Nietzsche who said we're content with being ignorant....nonetheless, there are eternal truths.... 2 + 2 = 4 is an eternal truth....granted an arbitrary eternal truth....but nonetheless, an eternal truth.....and perhaps we can't know everything is also an eternal truth....so who's to say we won't discover the eternal truth?

I don't assume and didn't state that the physical world was the only form of existence, and said that by using it as an example I wasn't proving anything.

Technically, I agree with you here (and fyi I understand the point of metaphysics, it's the beauty of learning english, you tend to end up with a larger vocab than many of those who have been speaking it their whole lives), so I'm going to shut up before I argue myself into a circle.
An infinte circle!

We can never verify infinity in any real case, as we can never say for sure