Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help

Georgina Parry: on 3/14/09 at 5:32am UTC, wrote Space time is not infinity expanding, so there is no need to answer this...

amrit: on 1/17/09 at 9:51am UTC, wrote there was no big bang, universe is a system in a permanent dynamic...

paul valletta: on 2/26/08 at 10:15am UTC, wrote “Without a way of calculating probabilities, cosmology is a dead...

March 23, 2017

ARTICLE: Phantasms of Infinity [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

paul valletta wrote on Feb. 26, 2008 @ 10:15 GMT
“Without a way of calculating probabilities,

cosmology is a dead science, it doesn’t exist,” says Vitaly Vanchurin of Tufts University. “At first, I thought, this is crazy, this is not science. But if we cannot answer

this question, we can’t do cosmology.” .

Probable cause of a bang, then a Boltzman Brain appearing next to you is close to "infinity", if every concievable permutation of likely "cause" events occuring, has happened, then the likelyhood of brains popping into existence increase's.

The BB is very similar to "egg and chicken" question, you can observe an egg emerging out of a chicken, just as you can observe a chicken emerging out of an egg, both occur and both have "probable cuase" ?

Now, Infinity for say counting of numbers cannot happen in a finite time, and thus anything that has a beginning, must have an end, example there is only one way to count to/for infinity, and it has a starting number, 1 and a following number 2, there happens a consecutive ordering process, 3 follows 2, and 4 follows 3.

Even a computer operating at the speed of light, and is in countinueous counting operative mode, will eventually fail in some way, a glitch in software or hardware, or the environment degrades to an extent the computer no longer functions, thus Infinity ( to keep on going forever ) cannot or will not be a probable outcome? really do need a glitch free supercomputer, that can operate for at least an eternity, and probably longer !

Nature has a functioning reset button, if something has a start point, then it probable has an end point, thus is infinity free, for the Universe, this may be effectively "continuous", or "cyclic" for a percieved eternity?

If there is an infinity of time and space, then there cannot have been a start point to time and a beginning to space? The Big-Bang model is actually infinity free, because it has, by its very implicated nature, had a starting point and it will evolve into a infinty free end point?

report post as inappropriate

amrit wrote on Jan. 17, 2009 @ 09:51 GMT
there was no big bang, universe is a system in a permanent dynamic equilibrium, no beginning, no end, see

iverse does not run in time as time is a measure of motion only, see file attached

attachments: Time_is_a_Measure_of_Motion_Sorli__2009.doc

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Mar. 14, 2009 @ 05:32 GMT
Space time is not infinity expanding, so there is no need to answer this question. There is a difference between the objective material universe that is coming together to form matter and structures and the electromagnetic image that is detected spreading out across space.

The image is interpreted to give a subjective reality of the universe that is not the same as its actual current objective material existence.

Its objective existence can not be seen. Its subjective existence is seen and currently calculations and speculations are based on this subjective reality only. This subjective reality is the reality in which relativity is observed.

report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'N' and 'P':

Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.