Endless space?
Ambassador From Hell
perhaps for the space occupied by the infinitely dense singularity
from which came the big bang. Much smaller than a single atom they
say. Einstein said that our universe is finite, didn't he? Seems to me
that is a widely accepted view. I think my own concept of infinite
comes from the writings of Benedict Spinoza. Anything regarding which
nothing greater than can be conceived is infinite. If our universe is
all that there is then I think it could be defined as infinite.
Tech
news:59bcc4af-f0f1-468a...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
I wouldn't say it that way. I would say: If our universe is all that there
is then I think it could be defined is infinite.
ZerkonX
> "Ambassador From Hell" <kmacn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:59bcc4af-f0f1-468a-9401-
bac70b...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>> Scientists say even space did not exist prior to the big bang. Except,
>> perhaps for the space occupied by the infinitely dense singularity from
>> which came the big bang. Much smaller than a single atom they say.
>> Einstein said that our universe is finite, didn't he? Seems to me that
>> is a widely accepted view. I think my own concept of infinite comes
>> from the writings of Benedict Spinoza. Anything regarding which nothing
>> greater than can be conceived is infinite. If our universe is all that
>> there is then I think it could be defined as infinite.
>
> I wouldn't say it that way. I would say: If our universe is all that
> there is then I think it could be defined is infinite.
I would drop the concept of 'universe' and insert 'existence'.
Since infinity, as a concept, defies a physical definition might be best
to keep it as close to a pure concept as possible. Universe, as a literal
thing, is just that - a thing of definable or yet to be defined things.
Things have finite limitation so they always must be 'inside' some larger
thing on and on.
Existence, on the other hand, sort of short circuits this loop in that it
is not a thing, it is a conceptual state that self-defines.
Ambassador From Hell
> "Ambassador From Hell" <kmacnev...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:59bcc4af-f0f1-468a...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
What if God is all that there is and everything we know of is either
in God or an extension of God? Including us?
Ambassador From Hell
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 13:23:21 +0200, Tech wrote:
> > news:59bcc4af-f0f1-468a-9401-
>
> bac70b430...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Scientists say even space did not exist prior to the big bang. Except,
> >> perhaps for the space occupied by the infinitely dense singularity from
> >> which came the big bang. Much smaller than a single atom they say.
> >> Einstein said that our universe is finite, didn't he? Seems to me that
> >> is a widely accepted view. I think my own concept of infinite comes
> >> from the writings of Benedict Spinoza. Anything regarding which nothing
> >> greater than can be conceived is infinite. If our universe is all that
> >> there is then I think it could be defined as infinite.
>
> > I wouldn't say it that way. I would say: If our universe is all that
> > there is then I think it could be defined is infinite.
>
> I would drop the concept of 'universe' and insert 'existence'.
>
> Since infinity, as a concept, defies a physical definition might be best
> to keep it as close to a pure concept as possible. Universe, as a literal
> thing, is just that - a thing of definable or yet to be defined things.
> Things have finite limitation so they always must be 'inside' some larger
> thing on and on.
>
> Existence, on the other hand, sort of short circuits this loop in that it
> is not a thing, it is a conceptual state that self-defines.
You speak above my head when you say existence is not a thing. But it
certainly is worth exploring such as in meditation. It sounds very
Taoist. Being and non-being are separated by a very thin demarcation.
Do you think reality is more properly referred to as a multiverse than
a universe? I think it may be that what we call the universe is (for
us) just a local phenomenon and that there are actually infinite
"universes," and more dimensions than that we are aware of.
ZerkonX
> You speak above my head when you say existence is not a thing.
Might be too much below your head.
'Thing' infers a physicality or related to physicality and as such
related to limitation.
Existence, on the other hand, implies physicality, or 'things' but only
as a subset to a more inclusive or, rather, all inclusive concept.
"...worth exploring such as in meditation"
you know the old adage about meditation, I guess. Think of thoughts as
clouds (things).. now, look at the sky.
Same thing(!!) I suppose.
Ambassador From Hell
> > news:59bcc4af-f0f1-468a-9401-
>
> bac70b430...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Scientists say even space did not exist prior to the big bang. Except,
> >> perhaps for the space occupied by the infinitely dense singularity from
> >> which came the big bang. Much smaller than a single atom they say.
> >> Einstein said that our universe is finite, didn't he? Seems to me that
> >> is a widely accepted view. I think my own concept of infinite comes
> >> from the writings of Benedict Spinoza. Anything regarding which nothing
> >> greater than can be conceived is infinite. If our universe is all that
> >> there is then I think it could be defined as infinite.
>
> > I wouldn't say it that way. I would say: If our universe is all that
> > there is then I think it could be defined is infinite.
>
> I would drop the concept of 'universe' and insert 'existence'.
>
> Since infinity, as a concept, defies a physical definition might be best
> to keep it as close to a pure concept as possible. Universe, as a literal
> thing, is just that - a thing of definable or yet to be defined things.
> Things have finite limitation so they always must be 'inside' some larger
> thing on and on.
>
> Existence, on the other hand, sort of short circuits this loop in that it
> is not a thing, it is a conceptual state that self-defines.
I get you, but certainly you concede that the typical usage of the
word universe is a reference to the known, observable universe for the
most part. I like something an astronomer said on a PBS TV series
about the universe. I am putting in my own words and I don't remember
the guy's name. The observable universe may be a lot like when a
person looks out on the earth from a high point such as a cliff by the
ocean. You can only see as far as the horizon but that doesn't mean
there is nothing beyond the horizon. "Maybe the farthest point that
any high tech telescope can see into deep space is nothing but to the
horizon and the "universe" is actually a trillion times larger than
they presently assume it to be."
From a Star Trek: The Next Generation episode (paraphrased):
"Do you think this is what they are saying is the end of the universe?
Or do you think that it's the beginning?"
Ambassador From Hell
If you can accumulus any benefit from it then all the more power to
you.