Discussion in 'Science' started by Patricio Da Silva, Jan 4, 2022.
Yes, it's more of a philosophical question, than a scientific one.
There's a TOE by Tom Campbell.
Consciousness must exist outside of this universe if there are other universes. According to people such as clairvoyants, there are lots and lots of them.
If the universe had a beginning, then it's likely that it will have an end.
Consider the cosmic egg model. In the center is a black hole/white hole, collector on one end and emitter on the other end. It's a process of outflow and return involving multiple universes and surrounding spaces in various stages of progression. There is expansion in the flow from the emitter, and contraction beyond the halfway point heading back into the collector.
Hindus count the overall time span in terms of yugas.
The bottom line is that no one really knows.
Not evidence that is machine detectable.
There is empirical evidence of reincarnation, which suggest the veracity of a non physical essence of our consciousness that exists beyond the physical body, but it's not enough to satisfy hard science. However, if it can be proven, then the concept that 'infinity exists in the abstract' becomes a lot more plausible.
that being said, it is interesting.
I just don't see that as logic + what we know today.
I don't see any chance of a human in this universe knowing what is going on in some other universe. So far, we have some theoretical physicists postulating that other universes might exist. But, not only is there no evidence of that, there is also no known method of finding evidence for that.
Also, in this universe the consciousness we know about is the seemingly increasing consciousness of a branch of the tree of life on Earth. What that means to anything else on this planet or universe in general and certainly in some other universe is totally unknown at best.
Halfway to what?
Surely unless dark matter proves to be a force that can push matter apart (overcoming gravity) , the process you describe above depends on gravity eventually drawing matter back into a point.
But the expansion of the universe put distance between matter and therefore weakens gravity (which is a function of mass).
If dark matter does exist, where did it come from and how does it expand, taking matter with it? It seems to be made up of a magnetically repellant force, as in a magnet with two poles the same charge.
Not only have humans yet to understand the limits of physics, they haven't even learned the limits of language and how it constrains their thinking.
IMO this is the value of poetry which unites experience and the innermost reaction of the writer with the most exact use of language.
It would be interesting to see such a form of linguistic expression that reflects the experience of man in the vastness of the unknown. There may be someone(s) who have tried but I don't know of any.
Most likely. Infinity exists in mathematics but not in nature.
Yes, mathematics exists in the abstract. Infinity, therefore, exists in the abstract.
But, the abstract is eternal. Whether or not the physical universe is infinite, is not known.
It seems more logical to me that the physical universe is infinite, and eternal.
Scientist Finds 'Evidence' of Another Universe Before This One — Curiosmos
So we disagree. The universe is not an abstract thing.
I did not assert that the universe is abstract, I asserted that Infinity exists in the abstract
I don't accept this "abstract" term - either for math or physics.
I don't believe saying "abstract" adds anything of value to any discussion concerning infinity.
In math, if you call infinity abstract then one has to call everything abstract - it doesn't add anything.
If this universe is infinite, that is a concrete physical property of this universe. Again, saying "abstract" does not add anything - I don't see how it is more than a nonsensical filler that sounds cool, but means nothing.
You said you believe the universe is infinite. Not only would I disagree with that but so would science.
My view is the academic view.
Mathematics reveals hidden patterns that help us understand the world around us. ... As a science of abstract objects, mathematics relies on logic rather than on observation as its standard of truth, yet employs observation, simulation, and even experimentation as means of discovering truth.
You see, Willreadmore, understanding the essence of what you are working with, is a good thing, not a bad thing.
The ONLY reason considerable attention has been paid to a relatively minor point, is your refusal to see it, and my continued effort to get you to understand it.
Otherwise, the concept would have been history in this conversation, many comments back.
I made a distinction:
I believe the universe is infinite, but whether it is or isn't, isn't known.
However, infinity does exist in the abstract.
A minor point, true, but true, nevertheless.
You're just points out math is ALL abstract.
And, so what does it add to claim that ONE item discussed in math is abstract?
Beyond that, the fact that math is abstract doesn't mean that physics is abstract.
I've always maintained that math exists, as a whole, in the abstract.
I only persisted on the point because you denied it. Had you acknowledged it, days back, we wouldn't be discussing now.
Never said it was. I found it interesting that the abstract has a profound influence on the physical world.
But you kept insisting math wasn't abstract, and that kept me persisting on the point.
But, you finally accept it, so, the conversation has resolved.
Again that word "abstract" shows up.
Why? What do you think that means? Are you talking about math or physics? If math, it's all abstract as you pointed out, so why is this part of the discussion of math? If physics, what do you think abstract means for physics?
In physics, if it is found that the universe is infinite, that isn't abstract at all - that is a verified physical property of the universe.
My point has been that calling "infinity" abstract adds no value when the topic is math, which is ALL abstract in the sense that there is no connection to the physical world that is made by math.
Physicists use math to describe the physical universe. Is THAT what you mean?
The catch there is that math is the language being used. That doesn't make physics abstract.
I did muff the way I stated that.
In previous conversations you've used this term to mean something quite different, applying it to physics in a way that you couldn't describe. And, here you appeared to again drag in into physics in some way.
That math exists in the abstract is a fact garnered via observation, just as a tree might be observed to be made of wood.
Nothing more than that, really.
But the question concerned physics - not math.
Separate names with a comma.