Ponder me this TTA science geeks
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-11-2012, 05:33 PM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
Honestly, it wasn't supposed to make sense.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 05:36 PM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(07-11-2012 05:10 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  If there is infinite amount of parallel universes doesn't that mean that there is a parallel universe where someone (alien or human or something else) finds a way to travel between these parallel and hence come to our parallel universe and kill us all 5seconds from now?

So because this hasn't happened does that make it safe to assume that there is not infinite number of parallel universes with infinite possibilities?
1st you have to assume this is even possible.

2nd. If something has not happened in this universe, does not mean it hasn't happened in another. The laws of physics wouldn't even be the same, never mind alien conquest.

3rd. No. It is a sound theory.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 05:36 PM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(08-11-2012 05:33 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  Honestly, it wasn't supposed to make sense.
Well that doesn't make sense either.. Maybe I should have read your next post.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2012, 05:51 PM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(08-11-2012 05:36 PM)Diablo666 Wrote:  
(08-11-2012 05:33 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  Honestly, it wasn't supposed to make sense.
Well that doesn't make sense either.. Maybe I should have read your next post.
Yes it does.

You said my first statement didn't make sense, I simply stated that it was not intended to make sense.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2012, 01:06 AM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(07-11-2012 05:10 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  If there is infinite amount of parallel universes doesn't that mean that there is a parallel universe where someone (alien or human or something else) finds a way to travel between these parallel and hence come to our parallel universe and kill us all 5seconds from now?

So because this hasn't happened does that make it safe to assume that there is not infinite number of parallel universes with infinite possibilities?
You forget to consider the 'anthropic principle' (a.k.a. circular reasoning for physicists Smile )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

Clearly you exist within one of the infinitely many universes where your prescribed outcome does not occur.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2012, 08:29 AM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(07-11-2012 08:33 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-11-2012 08:09 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  I see what you mean by infinite sizes, but it doesn't fit.
You can't have a fraction of a universe because it's just a whole universe that's just a different size.
If you have multiple of the same universe then you're just adding to the tally.

@Chas, I only got about half of what you're saying, how does exponents relate to this?
A power set is the set of subsets of a set. So let's say we have a set S={1,2,3}. The cardinality of that set is 3, that is the size, the count, the number of elements.
P(S), the power set of S, is the set {{}, {1}, {2}, {3}, {1,2}, {1,3}, {2,3}, {1,2,3}}. It is the set of sets which are subsets of S. Its cardinality is 8 (2^3), that is it has 8 elements, all of which are sets.

About infinity, there are two infinities that relate to our experience. Most people think they are the same, but one is larger than the other. The first one is an infinite number of things, the second and larger is an infinite extent. The first is the cardinality of the natural numbers {1,2,3,...}, the second is the cardinality of the continuum, of space, of the real numbers. The first is aleph nought, the second is aleph one.

Not sure what you're asking about exponents.
I'm just going to nod my head up and down and go "mmm, I see" every now and then to pretend I know wtf you're talking about.
Mmmm, I see I see.
But Chas, my scholarly chum, putting to one side that I still can't grasp the concept of two infinite's without the two being one, how do you know that the larger one is then the one in which the universe that kills everyone in our universe resides and our universe is then on the opposite.
Because even with two sort of lines of infinite universe's, that still doesn't wriggle out of my original point.
Yes one infinite multiverse may be bigger then another, but it is still infinite and so one of those universe things must kill us 5seconds from now. You can't just say, "but we're on the other line", because that line's infinite as well and so there is a universe that kills us 5seconds from now on that one too. And you can't say they cross each other because it doesn't matter if your a real number, a integer, a subset of subset whatever, if you're on an infinite line of multiverses, one of them must kill us 5seconds from now.

Quote:Have you gone back to read this yet because I have and it still doesn't make any sense.



And it's not slurping down rainbow shit if I'm more apt to lean toward
wondering if a cosmologist working with physics might have a better
understand of the universe and/or multiverse than some dude who rides a
moped and snarls at all the old ladies he can't pass.



That, and last night your mom sent me to a completely different
dimension when she did that thing with her third knuckle and and a
mango.

Excuse me, I'll have you know I ride a motorbike, not a moped, I'm not Italian (though if you knew how much pizza I ate you might wonder).
And I'm sure there are theists who would say Ray Comfort is highly educated and isn't to be questioned.
I'm not saying believe me or them, I just asking a question, if you don't know the answer then there's no need to be a cunt about it, dick.

And I'll have you know, whatever my mom does with a mango, it's got nothing on what your mom can do with a Pineapple... yeah, think about that.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2012, 08:36 AM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(09-11-2012 01:06 AM)BryanS Wrote:  
(07-11-2012 05:10 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  If there is infinite amount of parallel universes doesn't that mean that there is a parallel universe where someone (alien or human or something else) finds a way to travel between these parallel and hence come to our parallel universe and kill us all 5seconds from now?

So because this hasn't happened does that make it safe to assume that there is not infinite number of parallel universes with infinite possibilities?
You forget to consider the 'anthropic principle' (a.k.a. circular reasoning for physicists Smile )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

Clearly you exist within one of the infinitely many universes where your prescribed outcome does not occur.
No, that's a shitty argument.
For every universe where I don't die 5seconds from now, there is a universe that does kill everyone 5seconds from now.
Because in infinite you can't leave 1 stone unturned, and everyone not dying from now is leaving a stone unturned.

The only way for everyone to live 5 seconds from now is to either a) the theory is false/inaccurate or b) it's not possible for travel between parallel universes.
Those are the only logical conclusions. This extra stuff with multiple infinite's is just woo woo if you ask me (which is why nobody asks me about physics). Partially because I don't understand the concept of 2 infinite's, but also because you can't logically have two separate infinites in regards to real things.
ie: Yes there is an infinite between 0,1,2,3... etc.. and a second between numbers, 1.829347,1.9782328,1.98... etc...
But you can't get part of a universe. It might work on paper, but it's gotta work in real life.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2012, 08:43 AM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(09-11-2012 08:29 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  I'm just going to nod my head up and down and go "mmm, I see" every now and then to pretend I know wtf you're talking about.
Mmmm, I see I see.
But Chas, my scholarly chum, putting to one side that I still can't grasp the concept of two infinite's without the two being one, how do you know that the larger one is then the one in which the universe that kills everyone in our universe resides and our universe is then on the opposite.
Because even with two sort of lines of infinite universe's, that still doesn't wriggle out of my original point.
Yes one infinite multiverse may be bigger then another, but it is still infinite and so one of those universe things must kill us 5seconds from now. You can't just say, "but we're on the other line", because that line's infinite as well and so there is a universe that kills us 5seconds from now on that one too. And you can't say they cross each other because it doesn't matter if your a real number, a integer, a subset of subset whatever, if you're on an infinite line of multiverses, one of them must kill us 5seconds from now.

I'm just trying to aid your understanding of infinities; I haven't commented on multiverses.

However, with an infinite number of universes, there will be some number (possibly infinite) in which 'we' are all killed 5 seconds from now and some number (possibly infinite) in which 'we' are not all killed 5 seconds from now. If you are still here 5 seconds from now, you were in one of the latter number.

So what was your question about exponents?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2012, 08:46 AM
Re: RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(07-11-2012 07:48 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  There is an infinite number of integers from 0 to infinity. 0, 1, 2, 3, 4... 999.. 4,153,063... 93,633,823,968,230,088,000,239... etc.


However, there is an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1. 0.01, 0.00012285, 0.259832, 0.99999..., 0.23482234822348223482..., 0.02, 0.2000329, etc.


Since for every integer there is an infinite number of real numbers, that means that there are infinitely many more real numbers than there are integers

Which means that the infinite number of real numbers is larger than the infinite number of integer numbers. Ergo, different sizes of infinity.

But those numbers would be equal regardless of how small of chunks you measure. You're misunderstanding the admittedly confusing concept of infinity... Infinite inches is equal to infinite yards. Infinite divisions of 1/8 is equal to infinite divisions of 1/3. Infinite = never ending.

Better without God, and happier too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2012, 08:53 AM
RE: Ponder me this TTA science geeks
(09-11-2012 08:46 AM)Azaraith Wrote:  
(07-11-2012 07:48 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  There is an infinite number of integers from 0 to infinity. 0, 1, 2, 3, 4... 999.. 4,153,063... 93,633,823,968,230,088,000,239... etc.


However, there is an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1. 0.01, 0.00012285, 0.259832, 0.99999..., 0.23482234822348223482..., 0.02, 0.2000329, etc.


Since for every integer there is an infinite number of real numbers, that means that there are infinitely many more real numbers than there are integers

Which means that the infinite number of real numbers is larger than the infinite number of integer numbers. Ergo, different sizes of infinity.

But those numbers would be equal regardless of how small of chunks you measure. You're misunderstanding the admittedly confusing concept of infinity... Infinite inches is equal to infinite yards. Infinite divisions of 1/8 is equal to infinite divisions of 1/3. Infinite = never ending.
Are you stating that you believe there is only one infinity?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: