Your ideas here depend on the possibility that the physics of the universe we can observe is different than the physics of the universe in some place we can't observe - that gravity is different, that the speed of light is different, that th Planck constant is different, or that some other fundamental difference exists. This would be a STARTLING discovery. NO hint of that kind of phenomena has ever been detected. And, it would bring up serious questions concerning how some section of the universe could exist alongside a section of the universe that runs by different physics. Physicists ARE aware of the possibility that certain constants of physics might actually change over huge periods of time. But, physicists are aware of that and search for that kind of change. And, that CAN be examined, because the universe is so huge that it takes a very long time for electromanetic radiation to reach us from its sources. So, there IS evidence of how physics worked in the past, coming from what can be seen by our astrophysicists. Physicists state that this kind of change has not been found. I just don't see it as constructive to suggest physicists don't know what they are talking about on the grounds that if they could look just a little bit farther they would find a section of this universe where the most fundamental elements of physics are not like they are here.
Can we ever have evidence of something infinite? Or is infinity the time/space beyond the limitations of evidence?
That is a pointless comment. It would be better to give me an example of infinity in nature. I realize you can't do that so it makes your comment even more pointless.
What is scientific about expressing opinions? Apparently it is OK for you to do that but not for me. Your opinions are completely unscientific. Mathematics is not the voice of the universe. The universe has no intelligence or voice. If it did it would communicate with us. There is no evidence that the universe has been there forever. In fact scientists have calculated the age of the universe using that voice of the universe you seem to appreciate.
Bovine excrement STRAWMAN ignored for obvious reasons. Next time try responding to the actual CONTENT of my posts instead.
Proving a negative is impossible. You are the one making the claims. The onus of proof is on you. Show me your example of infinity in nature.
Calling out YOUR bovine excrement STRAWMAN in your post DOES address the content but obviously that went right over your head. Sad!
YOUR bogus allegation is that infinity does NOT exist therefore you MUST be able to provide the START and END points of Space-Time which would substantiate your bovine excrement. That you just ADMITTED above to NOT being able to do so PROVES that your allegation was pulled out of your nether regions...AGAIN!
This is the song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Someone started singing it not knowing what it was. And they'll continue singing it forever just because. This is the song that never ends. Infinity is not hard at all for me to imagine. You can always draw a bigger circle..... or longer line.
My "allegation" is the scientific position. It is so because nothing in nature has proven to be infinite. I don't have to prove that. You do. Yours is the unscientific statement. Prove the infinity. You aren't paying attention.
Wrong, as ALWAYS! If your position is "scientific" then WHERE are the FACTS to support it? The SCIENCE of MATHEMATICS establishes that the concept of infinity EXISTS. That PROVES that you pulled your bovine excrement allegation out of your nether regions/ Oh, the IRONY giving the vapid content of your posts.
Only one of us CANNOT substantiate his position with scientific FACTS and we all KNOW that it is NOT me.
I want to stop being involved in this nonsense so I will make this my last post. You made some claims that go against scientific thinking. I pointed that out. You asked to prove a negative which is impossible with all negatives. Now you claim you have substantiated your position with scientific facts and I haven't. The truth is you haven't substantiated any of your claims and I have not substantiated a negative because it is logically impossible to do that. Enough. Best of luck. You have the final word which I will ignore.
YOU made an asinine allegation that you CANNOT substantiate! The SCIENCE of MATHEMATICS supports my position and DEBUNKS your inane allegation. INFINITY is a math concept that even has it's own SYMBOL '∞' that YOU appear to have no knowledge of whatsoever. Not at all surprised that you are FLAILING around again given that ALL of your absurd allegations end up being EXPOSED as bovine excrement. Sad!
Astrophysicists do not share a belief that the universe is finite. They claim it is unknown whether it is finite or infinite. The size of the observable universe is pretty solidly agreed to be something close to 93B light years. But, the universe goes beyond that point, which is the point where light can travel fast enough that it can overcome the speed of the expansion of the universe. Beyond that 93B light years, light can't ever get here from there. Ever. So, the size of the observable universe is reasonably agreed. And, it's also agree that the total universe is WAY larger than the observable universe - and quite possibly infinite. They say that IF the total universe is finite then at the very smallest, it must be more than 200 times the size of the observable universe.
Mathematics is not a science. That mathematics ponders infinities is no guarantee they exist in nature. The Big Bang is widely thought to be the beginning of space time. There are various theories as to the fate of the universe some of which entail an end to space time.
Try to imagine this: There are an infinite number of integers. Between each integer there are an infinite number of rational numbers (i.e. fractions). Never the less the integers and rational numbers are the same order of infinity.
