Hey I am writing a paper on the Concept of Infinity for my math paper in college right now,but this helped me out. A LOT. Thank you. By the way have you heard of the Infinite monkey theorem. It's pretty funny should look it up on Wikipedia when you get the time.
my gosh this world is confusing. infinity is so hard to understand, a googolplex cant be written on a piece of paper as big as the universe yet they coined the googoldecaplex, the biggest harddrive is terabyte yet they still created geopbyte omfggag
I love your videos, I wanted to ask you something, I'd appreciate it if u replied, do u actualy believe in god, I mean the actual deity that lives in the sky and created the universe, I want to no as it would help me understand your video more and where your coming from thanks
Thank you for this though-provoking video. A few comments:
1. Infinity is a concept that might not be able to be understood fully by humans with limited perceptions and senses.
2. The greatest of math and logic geniuses could not fully dissect it (infinity, Cantor's theorem etc.). They all went mad and killed themselves (Cantor, Godel, Boltzmann, Turing, etc.)
3. The law of entropy (thermodynamics) says that in our universe (in the multi-verse) arrow of time is set by blueprint from Big Bang
what about a planck length? it says nothing REAL can have a size below a plank length. the same goes for time. so how can there be an infinity when it everything is just made out of a bunch of planck length and there can be nothing smaller?
@023132 I won't be able to give you an answer on this one - I can only ask a few things in response. Remember, that the plank length is the result of a mathematical formula and therefore just is a thought model in physics. Anyway,
- what are real things and can unreal things have a smaller size than a plank length?
- can science be sure not to find contradicting insights
- could the size of a plank length depend on the observer (like light)?
And then, there can still be infinitely many of them!
@iRibbit7 For fucks sake you wanker, I was looking up infinity to gain mathemetical insight on it, learning about expansions upon Cantors theorems and so on. Then I come to this piece of shit, which you do not label as your PERSONAL understanding that is not shared by reality or any one of academic note.
Can science be sure not to find contradicting insights? Of course fucking not, who gives a shit. Science is about reality and until we FIND such insight we base our decisions of what we know.
@iRibbit7 Holy fuck, that is so backwards. LENGTH depends on the observer, UNLIKE light. If you don't even know the general concept of Einsteins theories on relativity then you should spend your time researching rather than drawing some fucking phony conclusions of your own, as they will surely be false and not weigh up against current scientific knowledge.
No, unreal things can not have a smaller size than plank length as things which are not real have no dimensions, one of which is length.
@iRibbit7 Infinity is not real. Nothing in the universe can be labeled as infinity. Yes, you can divide a number by zero and by theory it would be infinity but nothing that is real can be infinite. The infinity symbol that you put on your paper in math is but a symbol, infinity is conceptual, imaginary and impossible. Also, are you German und sprechen sie deutsch?
This is basically just a recording of this guy's stream-of-(un)consciousness blithering with cutie-pie graphics tacked on. In other words: don't waste your time...
What I was saying is that there is a hierarchy of infinities. It is called Cantor's theorem -- the basic theorem in classical set theory. There is an interesting example called Hilbert Hotel. Prof. Joel Feinstein has an introduction vod on this topic(check JoelFeinstein's channel: Beyond infinity)
@uutorok Cantor's theorem is based on the believe that the world is finite, more specifically, that numbers like 1, 2, 3, ... exist separate for themselves without all the infinite numbers in between (like 1.004392... and so on). Of course this is not the case. In fact, no number at all EXISTS; they are only concepts of our minds. In the current and limited mathematical logic the theorem might be valid. However, it is logically false which explains the wide-spread objection of it.
@iRibbit7 you have to be joking. cantor knew very well what real numbers are.
tbh, couldn't watch more than 2 minutes of the video before i facepalmed and stopped it.
numbers and measurements are different ontological categories. 6 inches is a conceptual being, it's value exists in the minds of people who use the royal units and it refers to all physical being with a certain approximate length.
the number 6 is transcendent, it's value doesn't depend on the mind concieving it.
@omgopet Not sure how much facepalming will help to rethink that - but honestly: all concepts do only exist in the conceiving mind. No minds = no concepts. Everything else would be saying that any number would have existed from the beginning of time and space, just waiting for human discovery. Well, it's not that we suddenly bump into a 6 and say "hurray" we discovered a 6. We created the concept of 6. All mathematics are that way, they don't exist separate from us. They are a reflection of us.
@iRibbit7 From what i can see num,bers are existing on their own. upon observation one can see that the whirling of glalaxy creates both 6. 9, zero, 8.., all shapes and movements are taken into the first equasion when it was needed. in the beginning of such holograme that ended to be todays human NUMBers were not neven needed. The name of NUMBers suggests is real purpose.
I have experienced this first hand, during a "trip".
In a brief moment i became aware of oneness of all. I saw myself as a god and people around me as gods. Walking on a ground that was god and ants that are god. And we all were one moving and influencing one another.
This was truly liberating and life changing experience.
I know its different to reach this knowledge on purely intuitive basis. But i feel richer for this experience.
Too answer your two questions, my consciousness is not only contained in me, but is everywhere observing, so the answer would be infinity. for the second question an infinite amount of possibilities could happen so I could be experiencing infinite emotions.
Nice job. You have thought provoking material. When you think about our "world" in which we exist from the perspective in which you have presented, you realize that knowledge is infinite also because once you think you understand something, you realize that its just one of just infinite ways to think about it.
I've often wondered...is there really a "Now". If "now" a measure in our minds of a "point in time", relative to other points in time, and if time does not really exist but is a way that we relate to "change", how is it then that "now" exists? By the time my brain recognizes my "now", there is a tiny amount of change that has taken place, similar to how much time it takes light from my reflection in the mirror to reach my eyes and for my brain to recognize my reflection. Mind-bending. :-)
@Tripster3 Haha, that's a paradox! Is there really anything but "Now"? No! But then, if all is "Now" and there's nothing else (past/future), and there's no opposite or anything different to it, what is the sense of giving it a name? There is none!
And!, those things science revealed, e.g the processing time of the brain, or the limited speed of light, do NO'T create a difference to the Now (like a suggested past)! When you think to see your reflection of the past in a mirror, you think it NOW.
Title should be 'Misunderstanding Infinity'. Calculus could maybe change this for you much like Zeno's paradox.
Also, for real numbers: 1/infinity = 0;
.3 repeating + .3 repeating + .3 repeating = .9 repeating = 1 = 1/3 * 3
Inverse infinity is not infinitely small but rather effectively nothing. I think this may be a foundational misunderstanding for many.
unkledanbot 1 month ago
@unkledanbot
Indeed, and such concepts are only as useful as they may describe reality.
CupCakeArmy1 3 days ago
Comment removed
unkledanbot 1 month ago
limitation is a allusion. Infinite is reality, reality is information.
Gemeni3insane 1 month ago
Hey I am writing a paper on the Concept of Infinity for my math paper in college right now,but this helped me out. A LOT. Thank you. By the way have you heard of the Infinite monkey theorem. It's pretty funny should look it up on Wikipedia when you get the time.
alexk838 2 months ago
my gosh this world is confusing. infinity is so hard to understand, a googolplex cant be written on a piece of paper as big as the universe yet they coined the googoldecaplex, the biggest harddrive is terabyte yet they still created geopbyte omfggag
CrazyAvidGamer 3 months ago
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh?
juandager 4 months ago
I love your videos, I wanted to ask you something, I'd appreciate it if u replied, do u actualy believe in god, I mean the actual deity that lives in the sky and created the universe, I want to no as it would help me understand your video more and where your coming from thanks
Mindslave1985 5 months ago
INFINITY TIMES TWO!
hendrixslashmay 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Superstitious nonsense.
There is no god.
uriituw 7 months ago
Thank you for this though-provoking video. A few comments:
1. Infinity is a concept that might not be able to be understood fully by humans with limited perceptions and senses.
2. The greatest of math and logic geniuses could not fully dissect it (infinity, Cantor's theorem etc.). They all went mad and killed themselves (Cantor, Godel, Boltzmann, Turing, etc.)
3. The law of entropy (thermodynamics) says that in our universe (in the multi-verse) arrow of time is set by blueprint from Big Bang
garybalatennis 1 year ago
what about a planck length? it says nothing REAL can have a size below a plank length. the same goes for time. so how can there be an infinity when it everything is just made out of a bunch of planck length and there can be nothing smaller?
023132 1 year ago
@023132 I won't be able to give you an answer on this one - I can only ask a few things in response. Remember, that the plank length is the result of a mathematical formula and therefore just is a thought model in physics. Anyway,
- what are real things and can unreal things have a smaller size than a plank length?
- can science be sure not to find contradicting insights
- could the size of a plank length depend on the observer (like light)?
And then, there can still be infinitely many of them!
iRibbit7 1 year ago
@iRibbit7 For fucks sake you wanker, I was looking up infinity to gain mathemetical insight on it, learning about expansions upon Cantors theorems and so on. Then I come to this piece of shit, which you do not label as your PERSONAL understanding that is not shared by reality or any one of academic note.
Can science be sure not to find contradicting insights? Of course fucking not, who gives a shit. Science is about reality and until we FIND such insight we base our decisions of what we know.
PeruvianCactus 4 months ago
@iRibbit7 Holy fuck, that is so backwards. LENGTH depends on the observer, UNLIKE light. If you don't even know the general concept of Einsteins theories on relativity then you should spend your time researching rather than drawing some fucking phony conclusions of your own, as they will surely be false and not weigh up against current scientific knowledge.
No, unreal things can not have a smaller size than plank length as things which are not real have no dimensions, one of which is length.
PeruvianCactus 4 months ago
@iRibbit7 Infinity is not real. Nothing in the universe can be labeled as infinity. Yes, you can divide a number by zero and by theory it would be infinity but nothing that is real can be infinite. The infinity symbol that you put on your paper in math is but a symbol, infinity is conceptual, imaginary and impossible. Also, are you German und sprechen sie deutsch?
theforeverstone 1 month ago
@theforeverstone So ist es .) Aber auch Zahlen sind, genau wie "unendlich", nicht-real. Nur Symbole auf Papier und Konzepte in unseren Köpfen.
iRibbit7 4 weeks ago
@iRibbit7 Ich stimme Ihnen vollkommen zu. Wo in Deutschland wohnst du?
theforeverstone 4 weeks ago
@theforeverstone Ich wohne in Iserlohn :)
iRibbit7 1 week ago
@iRibbit7 Ich lebe in den USA und meine Familie lebt in Köln
theforeverstone 1 week ago
This is basically just a recording of this guy's stream-of-(un)consciousness blithering with cutie-pie graphics tacked on. In other words: don't waste your time...
flizbarg 1 year ago
man, you need to learn more math. The equation infinity^infinity is not equal to infinity. There are hierarchies between different infinities.
uutorok 1 year ago
@uutorok The laws of finite mathematics don't apply to infinity. For example
- Infinity MINUS Infinity IS NOT Zero
- Infinity DIVIDED by Infinity IS NOT One (1) (but every possible number)
- Infinity + 1 = Infinity
- Infinity ^ Infinity = Infinity
- Square Root of Infinity = Infinity
If this seems illogical to you, you're close to gain understanding.
iRibbit7 1 year ago 5
@iRibbit7
What I was saying is that there is a hierarchy of infinities. It is called Cantor's theorem -- the basic theorem in classical set theory. There is an interesting example called Hilbert Hotel. Prof. Joel Feinstein has an introduction vod on this topic(check JoelFeinstein's channel: Beyond infinity)
uutorok 1 year ago
@uutorok Cantor's theorem is based on the believe that the world is finite, more specifically, that numbers like 1, 2, 3, ... exist separate for themselves without all the infinite numbers in between (like 1.004392... and so on). Of course this is not the case. In fact, no number at all EXISTS; they are only concepts of our minds. In the current and limited mathematical logic the theorem might be valid. However, it is logically false which explains the wide-spread objection of it.
iRibbit7 1 year ago
@iRibbit7
Well, I think I shouldn't discuss math with you. You are free to define your own "mathematics". that's for sure. End of conversation.
uutorok 1 year ago
@iRibbit7 you have to be joking. cantor knew very well what real numbers are.
tbh, couldn't watch more than 2 minutes of the video before i facepalmed and stopped it.
numbers and measurements are different ontological categories. 6 inches is a conceptual being, it's value exists in the minds of people who use the royal units and it refers to all physical being with a certain approximate length.
the number 6 is transcendent, it's value doesn't depend on the mind concieving it.
omgopet 2 months ago
@omgopet Not sure how much facepalming will help to rethink that - but honestly: all concepts do only exist in the conceiving mind. No minds = no concepts. Everything else would be saying that any number would have existed from the beginning of time and space, just waiting for human discovery. Well, it's not that we suddenly bump into a 6 and say "hurray" we discovered a 6. We created the concept of 6. All mathematics are that way, they don't exist separate from us. They are a reflection of us.
iRibbit7 2 months ago
@iRibbit7 From what i can see num,bers are existing on their own. upon observation one can see that the whirling of glalaxy creates both 6. 9, zero, 8.., all shapes and movements are taken into the first equasion when it was needed. in the beginning of such holograme that ended to be todays human NUMBers were not neven needed. The name of NUMBers suggests is real purpose.
bernsten11 2 months ago in playlist The Eternal Now Extra - I Ribbit 7
@iRibbit7 Infinity minus infinity not being zero is something that really blows my mind. I don't fully understand why, but it makes sense to me.
Rookz 1 year ago
@iRibbit7 i think uutorok was reffering to being countably infinite vs incountably infinite
jlmknight 2 months ago
I have experienced this first hand, during a "trip".
In a brief moment i became aware of oneness of all. I saw myself as a god and people around me as gods. Walking on a ground that was god and ants that are god. And we all were one moving and influencing one another.
This was truly liberating and life changing experience.
I know its different to reach this knowledge on purely intuitive basis. But i feel richer for this experience.
Lobotom1st 1 year ago
Too answer your two questions, my consciousness is not only contained in me, but is everywhere observing, so the answer would be infinity. for the second question an infinite amount of possibilities could happen so I could be experiencing infinite emotions.
Bkingmeaty 1 year ago
Nice job. You have thought provoking material. When you think about our "world" in which we exist from the perspective in which you have presented, you realize that knowledge is infinite also because once you think you understand something, you realize that its just one of just infinite ways to think about it.
mescience 1 year ago
I've often wondered...is there really a "Now". If "now" a measure in our minds of a "point in time", relative to other points in time, and if time does not really exist but is a way that we relate to "change", how is it then that "now" exists? By the time my brain recognizes my "now", there is a tiny amount of change that has taken place, similar to how much time it takes light from my reflection in the mirror to reach my eyes and for my brain to recognize my reflection. Mind-bending. :-)
Tripster3 1 year ago
@Tripster3 Haha, that's a paradox! Is there really anything but "Now"? No! But then, if all is "Now" and there's nothing else (past/future), and there's no opposite or anything different to it, what is the sense of giving it a name? There is none!
And!, those things science revealed, e.g the processing time of the brain, or the limited speed of light, do NO'T create a difference to the Now (like a suggested past)! When you think to see your reflection of the past in a mirror, you think it NOW.
iRibbit7 1 year ago
It is even hard to comment with too many thoughts at once. Now is always the best time. You are a philosopher and I appreciate that.
7sevo7 1 year ago
@7sevo7 Thank you Mr. 7sevo7 :D
iRibbit7 1 year ago