Devans99

Real life parameters like the size/age of the universe are quantities. Infinity is not a quantity. Hence the universe is finite. You say infinity is a...

Here is an argument that time is discrete. Consider: - 1 second of time - 1 year of time According to the definition of continuous, both intervals mus...

1. So we agree it's not a number. All physical quantities including time as space can be represented by numbers. Numbers reflect reality and they do n...

The point is I do not agree with some of the definitions. How exactly is the axiom of infinity from set theory logical? I just disproved the existence...

(reposted from lounge) Actual infinity, if it existed, would be a quantity greater than all other quantities, but: There is no quantity X such that X ...

Then it's defined wrong. There is no value of x for which 1/x = 0. Perhaps you are thinking of Actual Infinity? Actual infinity, if it existed, would ...

That's impossible I'm afraid. Actual Infinity does not exist so negative Actual Infinity does not exist so past eternity does not exist (same structur...

Then t1 is the first moment and the universe is temporally finite.

We had a recent discussion on the premise of you OP and I/we are in agreement with you I think: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4562/we-dont...

1. I proved twice it does not exist in maths. What was wrong with those proofs? 2. It's impossible to construct, geometrically or otherwise. 3. It's n...

All forms of infinity are impossible. The concept itself is fatally flawed, for example: ? + 1 = ? implies 1 = 0 Surely the mother of all proofs of co...

Time is Time is fundamental to the universe. The speed of light speed limit (speed = distance / TIME) is obeyed by every particle in the universe and ...

Time is a series: Now (t=0) only exists because t=-1 had existence. t=-1 only exists because t=-2 had existence. So all moments must have a moment pri...

Fractals have a potentially infinite circumference (potentially depending on how many calculations we do). Fractals never have an Actually Infinite ci...

Are you saying the equal sign means 'arbitrary close' rather than 'equals'?

Time is a series. You can't just arbitrary remove points from a series and the rest of the series remain intact. That's just common sense. Take away a...

But arbitrarily close to zero is not zero and is never zero. The limit expression is always > zero.

Maths has a responsibility to make logical sense. 1/x = 0 Is false for all x (undefined for 0). So writing lim x->? 1/x = 0 is definitely wrong 1/x is...

But to write equals when something is not equals? Mathematics should follow logic.

All I need is a grasp of the english language: equal adjective the same in amount, number, or size https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english...

I don't see anything in the links to justify writing equal when something is plainly not equal.

Emotional pleasure/pain is a very broad category. I enjoy debating on line because the truth gives me pleasure for example. All my motivations likewis...

But the universe is finite so we cannot have anything traveling at an infinite speed else it would not be in the universe.

You are avoiding my argument. 1/x = 0 Is false for all x (undefined for 0). So writing lim x->? 1/x = 0 is definitely wrong

lim x->? 1/x = 0 is an error. For no value of x does 1/x take the value 0.

Time is fundamental because we can't have stuff flying around at infinite speeds in a sane universe. There has to be a speed limit so the universe mus...

If it's not a personal question, what motivates you?

I don't need to understand advanced calculus to point out an obvious notational error.

I remain convinced of the Special Theory of Relativity.

I agree the connection is new. But the existing idea traces its heritage to an older idea or directly to our senses. So inspiration seems to be provid...

I see time as fundamental to the universe: The speed of light speed limit (speed = distance / TIME) is obeyed by every particle in the universe and ex...

No idea.

Well I look at my routine. For example I put the trash out. Because it gives me pleasure to have a clean house. I go to bed on time because it gives m...

Your routine must reward you in some way else you would not do it. That reward counts as pleasure.

So you agree we should write: lim x->? 1/x ~ 0 rather than: lim x->? 1/x = 0 ?

How else do we derive new knowledge? It seems its always via links to existing knowledge (and ultimately to our senses). I'm not saying its abduction/...

But I have the same basic drivers as a bonobo; we both seek physical/emotional pleasure and shun physical/emotional pain.

What drives you then if it is not physical/emotional pleasure/pain?

But the only currency humans understand is physical/emotional pleasure/pain, so we can define: good = pleasure > pain evil = pain > pleasure Good has ...

Rather than saying I'm wrong, please say why I'm wrong (be specific).

Computer: input -> logic -> output Us: senses->logic-> action Everything we can deduce/adduce is from our senses. Our memory is filled with things ded...

No-one so far has managed to come up with an example of a truly new idea; IE something that does not trace it's heritage to an old idea or observation...

How so?

What might happen is someone evaluates a limit and then they take the result as precise when it's only approximate. If it then depends critically whet...

The physical world (=universe) must have a temporal beginning. How can something exist without a temporal beginning? If you take away the Big Bang, th...

I know the textbook definition, the question the OP poses is: 'is the textbook definition correct?'.

So I think creation of 'new' ideas is more like filling in links. We start with an existing idea (which can be traced back to our senses) and what we ...

If it is derived, I'd say it is not truly original.

The problem being if you take the result =0 and use it somewhere else, you have lost the information that it never actually =0, if you see what I mean...

Yes. Going back to the computer analogy, our senses are the only input mechanism we have so all information must ultimately be traced back to somethin...