Theory of Infinity (defined)

The following is a post copied from another forum:

Hi Mike,

You and my professor are like two opposite poles, therefore, it is easier for me to see the middle ground.

Now your definitions on infinity are not relevant to the subject. We are discussing black holes and general relativity predicted (before BHs were even found) that spacetime would curve to infinity given there were adequate gravitational forces. Although, now we've found these black holes we can't define this theory because we can't (or won't) define infinity...

So we come up with absurd theories....

Sorry if I sounded moody in my post, but, I WAS making a valid point. My theory is at least backed up by mathematics and I simply stated to you (and to my professor) that within a BH exists infinite spacetime. Your responses were that BHs are a wormhole or some other-worldly 'Star-Trek' unknown and I'm the one with the problem.

What's the difference between infinite spacetime and finite spacetime? (That is besides an interesting looking grid image)

Well finite spacetime can be measured by Special Relativity. Infinite spacetime cannot. Finite spacetime by definition has a start and finish point. Infinite spacetime does not.

Finite does not equal Infinity.

Therefore an infinite/finite spacetime is as absurd as calling a blackhole blue.

How does infinite spacetime fit into a blackhole?

Well if you can imagine throwing a container into a black hole. Then outside
and inside this container would be infinite spacetime. If I then place a lid on the container the inside would still be infinite spacetime.

Finite spacetime has a burnout and therefore at the end of this universe it will implode. Sorry to ruin the ending for you. My professor stated that an electron was also a BH. I guess he was right.

I know I'm quite juvinile (Hell I barely even attended High School) at all this but I call a spade a spade and infinite spacetime is exactly as the name suggests.

So outside this finite universe is an infinite spacetime. We ARE encased in a bubble and outside that is the largest damn blackhole you ever did see.

As for a singularity, at the event horizon you've found your singularity. Spacetime is bent to infinity at this point and to go in any further to find something else is futile.

You stated that I needed to use maths (as others did) to assist my theories, but hey, where I'm going there is no maths you can describe. My boyfriend was right when he quoted someone saying 'If you can't explain what your doing in plain english then you are doing something wrong'.

Josephine

[Tormod]

Why are you posting this when we are already discussing your theory in the astro/cosmo forum?

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by liliangrn

Well if you can imagine throwing a container into a black hole. Then outside
and inside this container would be infinite spacetime. If I then place a lid on the container the inside would still be infinite spacetime.

Would this container have a finite volume? If so, how could it hold an infinite volume of anything? Let's just say for instance that it is a 5 gallon bucket. How are you going to put more than 5 gallons of anything into it?

Hi again Clay and Tomrod,

I'm sorry I reposted the theory, but when I wrote my original post I wasn' t thinking all that clearly. I think this version is a little easier to read and more simply defined.

Clay, I was as confused about infinite spacetime within a defined space, as you are, when I first heard it. But it can be explained thus:

If you were out lost in infinite spacetime; where are you? what time is it? how large are you?
Any direction you move you are still infinite spacetime.

IF you had an empty container filled with infinite spacetime how much is in there?
What would you be comparing it to?
Your five gallon tub definition only works within a finite space.
Everything is infinite. Within the tub, out of the tub, it doesn't matter.

The edge of a black hole is the edge of this finite space. Beyond that maths as a clearly defineable measurement ceases to exist.

Josephine

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by liliangrn

IF you had an empty container filled with infinite spacetime how much is in there?

Then the container itself must be infinite. I don't believe the universe as we know it is infinite though as it has been measured to be finite. I do believe it is contained in a larger infinite space though.

Exactly Clay,

An object in infinite spacetime also equals infinity. Good thinking. In this finite space we compare the size of objects in relation to spaces and times based on the fact that they are finite. But in the infinite spacetime.

x = 8 / infinity = infinity / 8 = infinity

Cool, huh?

[Qfwfq]

Originally Posted by liliangrn

8 / infinity = infinity / 8 = infinity

Cool, huh?

No, not cool, only wrong.

lim(x --> inf)(8/x) = 0

lim(x --> inf)(x/8) = inf

Infinity is described as bad mathematics. I believe that most physicists would much prefer to zero to infinity. At least then zero can be defined. Let me first state that zero is a rather antiquated notion, because, wherever we look expecting to find nothing, something always rears it's head. Even the much revered singularity remains rather elusive doesn't it? You cannot show me zero space, zero time, zero energy, zero anything, zero nothing or non-existence.
The universe once thought to be a vacuum has now been found to be full of stuff; mass, energy, radiation, waves, force, etc.

We can however experience infinity and not merely as a limit. Actual time and space, not in a relative sense, is infinite. Logically the universe could not be derived from nothing.
Infinity as a limit is a rather nice idea if you are into that kind of thing. i.e. defining everything finitely.

Physicists keep coming up with mathematical equations, in an attempt, to define BHs. Yet all attempts so far have produced infinite outcomes. (one zero outcome was produced, to my knowledge, but since black holes have mass and gravity this is not overly viable) My theory is not a statement that would cease all research into black holes. It's just a theory that is attempting to explain an undefinable phenomenom. At least I have a theory which is by no means unrealistic. The main problem with my theory is the word 'infinity'. It just seems to protrude bile from the mouths of mathematicians as if I had spoken a '*hush, hush*' dirty word.

Remember we came from infinity, we are surrounded by it, you cannot escape infinity and by all means we cannot ignore infinity indefinitely.

Josephineeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... and so on

[Tormod]

These are musings which might seem interesting but they have little scientific value, Josephine. This topic might fit better in the Philosophy of Science forum.

Zero is indeed an important and valid concept, and is one of humanity's greatest inventions.

And - not all explanations of black holes create infinities. String theory avoids infinites.

I also reviewed a book a while back by Ernest Sternglass, "Before the beginning". He does not believe in an initial singularity (ie that there is a singularity at T-0). Review is here:
http://www.hypography.com/article.cfm?id=28091

I would also recommend a brand new book by John Barrow, "The Infinite Book" which discusses the history of the concept of inifinity, and also many of the issues and problems it raises in both culture, science, and religion.

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by liliangrn

Infinity is described as bad mathematics. I believe that most physicists would much prefer to zero to infinity. At least then zero can be defined. Let me first state that zero is a rather antiquated notion, because, wherever we look expecting to find nothing, something always rears it's head. Even the much revered singularity remains rather elusive doesn't it? You cannot show me zero space, zero time, zero energy, zero anything, zero nothing or non-existence.
The universe once thought to be a vacuum has now been found to be full of stuff; mass, energy, radiation, waves, force, etc.

We can however experience infinity and not merely as a limit. Actual time and space, not in a relative sense, is infinite. Logically the universe could not be derived from nothing.
Infinity as a limit is a rather nice idea if you are into that kind of thing. i.e. defining everything finitely.

Physicists keep coming up with mathematical equations, in an attempt, to define BHs. Yet all attempts so far have produced infinite outcomes. (one zero outcome was produced, to my knowledge, but since black holes have mass and gravity this is not overly viable) My theory is not a statement that would cease all research into black holes. It's just a theory that is attempting to explain an undefinable phenomenom. At least I have a theory which is by no means unrealistic. The main problem with my theory is the word 'infinity'. It just seems to protrude bile from the mouths of mathematicians as if I had spoken a '*hush, hush*' dirty word.

Remember we came from infinity, we are surrounded by it, you cannot escape infinity and by all means we cannot ignore infinity indefinitely.

Josephineeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... and so on

I think perhaps you might enjoy reading through the oast Astronomy News and Space News articles here to see what others in the astronomy community think about our universe and black holes.