Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 10:33:43 +0530 From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> To: Matthew Fuller <fullermd@linkfast.net> Cc: Tim Vanderhoek <vanderh@ecf.utoronto.ca>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Infinite quantities in nature! (was Re: The Ethics of Free Software) Message-ID: <20000526103343.A1459@physics.iisc.ernet.in> In-Reply-To: <20000525230446.A89273@linkfast.net>; from fullermd@linkfast.net on Thu, May 25, 2000 at 11:04:46PM -0500 References: <20000524205815.A79001@mad> <200005250137.SAA12207@usr05.primenet.com> <20000524222053.A80883@mad> <20000525230446.A89273@linkfast.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Time, like space, is a convention, not a form. Thus, how can it be > 'stored' in any way, if it doesn't strictly speaking 'exist'? > > > > Or, rephrased, the same question: "Are there a finite or an infinite > > number of states in which the universe can be?" > > If it's a 'universe', one would kinda have to think an infinite number > of states are potentially extant. Or, at least, an unbounded finite > number, which is, of course, a seperate thing, but for the purposes of > this discussion is indistinguishable. The number of states has nothing to do with the number of particles or the size of the universe. A particle in a box can have an infinite number of states -- continuously infinite (like the set of real numbers) in classical mechanics, countably infinite (like the set of integers) in quantum mechanics. The universe has lots of particles (perhaps infinite) in a huge box (perhaps infinitely big), why is it surprising that it has an infinite number of possible states? > possible simultaneously. In fact, I'd say it was impossible, since the > majority (of that infinite number, which is an interesting concept to > conjure with) would be mutually exclusive. And since the majority of an > infinite quantity is an infinite quantity, you're left with a finite > number of useful states. Wrong argument. For instance, the set of real numbers is infinite, and "most" of them (a mathematician would say "almost all") are irrational, but the rational numbers are also infinite in number. If you only want to stick with countably infinite sets (like rational numbers or integers), one could say the majority of integers (99% of any random selection) are not divisible by 100, yet an infinite number are. Before talking about what infinite wealth means, one has to quantify wealth. Is intellectual knowledge wealth? Certainly some people are willing to pay for it. But the amount of undiscovered knowledge about the universe is infinite. Is software wealth? The number of programs that could be written is infinite. How much of that wealth is realisable in the sense that you can keep writing software and people will keep buying it and making you richer? Certainly not an infinite amount, but probably "unlimited" which is different from "infinite" -- you can't put an upper bound and say "the pie can grow so big but no bigger". R. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000526103343.A1459>