Infinite Past Time

[pax]

An infinite point is a point that can never be reached, for there is always one more unit of time or space before you get there.

Therefore, an infinite future is a future which can never be reached. It is not an impossibility as it is not yet realized, that is, it has not yet come into existence.

An infinite past, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter. While an infinite past, like an infinite future, can never be reached, it is impossible because an event in an infinite past requires an infinite amount of time for its effects to reach the present, and an infinite amount of time is an amount of time that can never be realized.

Think of a star existing an infinite amount of distance away. Could its light ever reach us? Of course not.

Therefore, a present time dependant upon events which happened in an infinite past simply cannot exist, nor can they ever exist, for in order for them to exist an infinite amount of time must first pass.

Ergo, to propose a universe which has an infinite past is to propose a universe which cannot exist.

Ergo, because we know the universe does indeed exist, we also know the universe does not have an infinite past.

[Bust Nak]

Infinity (symbol: ∞) refers to something without any limit, and is a concept relevant in a number of fields, predominantly mathematics and physics. Having a recognizable history in these disciplines reaching back into the time of ancient Greek civilization, the term in the English language derives from Latin infinitas, which is translated as "unboundedness".[1]

In mathematics, "infinity" is often treated as if it were a number (i.e., it counts or measures things: "an infinite number of terms") but it is not the same sort of number as the real numbers. In number systems incorporating infinitesimals, the reciprocal of an infinitesimal is an infinite number, i.e. a number greater than any real number. Georg Cantor formalized many ideas related to infinity and infinite sets during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In the theory he developed, there are infinite sets of different sizes (called cardinalities).[2] For example, the set of integers is countably infinite, while the set of real numbers is uncountably infinite.

Zero: 2. Mathematics
a. The identity element for addition.
b. A cardinal number indicating the absence of any or all units under consideration.
c. An ordinal number indicating an initial point or origin.
d. An argument at which the value of a function vanishes.

Ah, sorry for wasting your time, that wasn't what I had in mind. What I meant by difference was subtraction. I was simply asking what is the result of infinity minus zero. Although I think the explaination of infinite and zero will help highlight the point I was making.

Is there any problem with asking: What is the answer to ∞ - 0 = ?

[pax]

Infinity (symbol: ∞) refers to something without any limit, and is a concept relevant in a number of fields, predominantly mathematics and physics. Having a recognizable history in these disciplines reaching back into the time of ancient Greek civilization, the term in the English language derives from Latin infinitas, which is translated as "unboundedness".[1]

In mathematics, "infinity" is often treated as if it were a number (i.e., it counts or measures things: "an infinite number of terms") but it is not the same sort of number as the real numbers. In number systems incorporating infinitesimals, the reciprocal of an infinitesimal is an infinite number, i.e. a number greater than any real number. Georg Cantor formalized many ideas related to infinity and infinite sets during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In the theory he developed, there are infinite sets of different sizes (called cardinalities).[2] For example, the set of integers is countably infinite, while the set of real numbers is uncountably infinite.

Zero: 2. Mathematics
a. The identity element for addition.
b. A cardinal number indicating the absence of any or all units under consideration.
c. An ordinal number indicating an initial point or origin.
d. An argument at which the value of a function vanishes.

Ah, sorry for wasting your time, that wasn't what I had in mind. What I meant by difference was subtraction. I was simply asking what is the result of infinity minus zero. Although I think the explaination of infinite and zero will help highlight the point I was making.

Is there any problem with asking: What is the answer to ∞ - 0 = ?

∞ - 0 = ? translates thus:

[an infinite number of units] - [the absence of any units under consideration]

As the golden rule is: n-0=n, and infinity in this case is being treated as a number, then ∞ - 0 = ∞

The following is also true (if infinity is being treated as a number):

∞ - [any real number] = ∞

[Bust Nak]

∞ - 0 = ? translates thus:

[an infinite number of units] - [the absence of any units under consideration]

As the golden rule is: n-0=n, and infinity in this case is being treated as a number, then ∞ - 0 = ∞

The following is also true (if infinity is being treated as a number):

∞ - [any real number] = ∞

Well, I wasn't expecting this espically with the wiki article stating infinite is not a number. The answer is undefined, because ∞ - 0 is not a valid operation. Neither is ∞ - ∞, 0 - ∞, or any other mathematical operation for that matter. But I am guess you know this, hence the (if infinity is being treated as a number) clause.

As a demo, lets assume ∞ - 0 = ∞:

Code: Select all

        ∞ - 0 = ∞
∞ - 0 - ∞ + 0 = ∞ - ∞ + 0       - (∞ + 0) on both side
        ∞ - ∞ = 0
    ∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1           + 1 on both side
            1 = 0

[pax]

∞ - 0 = ? translates thus:

[an infinite number of units] - [the absence of any units under consideration]

As the golden rule is: n-0=n, and infinity in this case is being treated as a number, then ∞ - 0 = ∞

The following is also true (if infinity is being treated as a number):

∞ - [any real number] = ∞

Well, I wasn't expecting this espically with the wiki article stating infinite is not a number. The answer is undefined, because ∞ - 0 is not a valid operation. Neither is ∞ - ∞, 0 - ∞, or any other mathematical operation for that matter. But I am guess you know this, hence the (if infinity is being treated as a number) clause.

As a demo, lets assume ∞ - 0 = ∞:

Code: Select all

        ∞ - 0 = ∞
∞ - 0 - ∞ + 0 = ∞ - ∞ + 0       - (∞ + 0) on both side
        ∞ - ∞ = 0
    ∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1           + 1 on both side
            1 = 0

0 + 1 = 0 ????????????????????

∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1

1 = 1

But...Bust...Bust....

What is the matter with you?

I thought you were more clever than that.

Your little shell game (adding more zeros to the equation) tries to palm the pea (1) on the right side of the equation while no one is looking.

Everyone knows that 0+1=1.

You need to practice a little more.

ETA -- Did someone really dupe you with that? You can't be too careful who your friends are.

[Bust Nak]

0 + 1 = 0 ????????????????????

No, let me break down the final steps some more:

Code: Select all

                    ∞ - 0 = ∞
            ∞ - 0 - ∞ + 0 = ∞ - ∞ + 0       - ∞ + 0 on both side, i.e move the ∞ to one side and 0 the other
a)                  ∞ - ∞ = 0
                ∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1           + 1 on both side
              ∞ - (∞ + 1) = 0 + 1
b)                  ∞ - ∞ = 1               substitute (∞ + 1) = ∞
                        1 = 0               substitute a) and b)

Do you see it now?

[pax]

0 + 1 = 0 ????????????????????

No, let me break down the final steps some more:

Code: Select all

                    ∞ - 0 = ∞
            ∞ - 0 - ∞ + 0 = ∞ - ∞ + 0       - ∞ + 0 on both side, i.e move the ∞ to one side and 0 the other
a)                  ∞ - ∞ = 0
                ∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1           + 1 on both side
              ∞ - (∞ + 1) = 0 + 1
b)                  ∞ - ∞ = 1               substitute (∞ + 1) = ∞
                        1 = 0               substitute a) and b)

Do you see it now?

This is too funny, Bust!

∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1
∞ - (∞ + 1) = 0 + 1
∞ - ∞ = 1

So, now, you use your little shell (parentheses) to slip the pea (1) out.

By what law of mathematics do you suddenly insert parenthesis where none are warranted?

If my old high school math teacher, Mr. Popkowski (may God grant him eternal rest) was here, he would beat you over the head with his pointer.

But, don't stop trying, Bust.

This is hilarious!



Again, I have to ask you: Were you really duped by this little shell game?

I sure hope this is not the way cosmologists do their math.

[Bust Nak]

By what law of mathematics do you suddenly insert parenthesis where none are warranted?

Opps. You are right. I did make a mistake.

Code: Select all

  ∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1 
  ∞ + 1 - ∞ = 0 + 1 
(∞ + 1) - ∞ = 0 + 1
      ∞ - ∞ = 1 

That's better.

So, now, you use your little shell (parentheses) to slip the pea (1) out.

Of course it's a shell game. The whole point was infinity is not a number; And you can get all sorts of wacky result if you treat it as one.

If my old high school math teacher, Mr. Popkowski (may God grant him eternal rest) was here, he would beat you over the head with his pointer.

I have a feeling he would agree that infinity isn't a number and arithmetic operations on it are invalid.

[pax]

By what law of mathematics do you suddenly insert parenthesis where none are warranted?

Opps. You are right. I did make a mistake.

Code: Select all

  ∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1 
  ∞ + 1 - ∞ = 0 + 1 
(∞ + 1) - ∞ = 0 + 1
      ∞ - ∞ = 1 

That's better.

Same shell. Same game.

You can't put the parenthesis there either, Bust

Let's look at just this formula here: ∞ + 1 - ∞ = 0 + 1

You have --

+ ∞

- ∞

+ 1

=

0

+ 1

Now, as there are no multiplication or division signs the numbers (or symbols) on one side of the equal sign can be arranged any way you like so long as they remain on their side of the equal sign. The same goes for the numbers (or symbols) on the other side of the equal sign.

You cannot just introduce parentheses into the formula, as there is no justification for introducing parentheses into the formula. Adding parentheses is a means of simplifying a formula, and that formula is already as simplified as it can be.

Ergo --

+ ∞ and - ∞ cancel each other out, and you are left with 1 on the left side of the equal sign.

If my old high school math teacher, Mr. Popkowski (may God grant him eternal rest) was here, he would beat you over the head with his pointer.

I have a feeling he would agree that infinity isn't a number and arithmetic operations on ∞ are invalid.

It can be used as a number, but not in the way you are using it.

Now, Bust, I am reaching the point where I have to conclude one of two things. Either you are really deficient in basic math skills, or you are attempting to deceive me.

So, in all Christian charity, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume that you are really deficient in basic math skills.

[Bust Nak]

You can't put the parenthesis there either, Bust

I double checked this time. I can put it there. Not that I need parentheses in the first place, just highlighting my substitution. The left most operation already have precedence in the first place.

You cannot just introduce parentheses into the formula, as there is no justification for introducing parentheses into the formula. Adding parentheses is a means of simplifying a formula, and that formula is already as simplified as it can be.

Well actually, addition have the property of associative.

That lets me move the + 1 around.

What I had wrong before hand was I place the brackets after an subtraction.

So, in all Christian charity, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume that you are really deficient in basic math skills.

So you are saying a + b - c isn't equal to (a + b) - c?

[pax]

You can't put the parenthesis there either, Bust

I double checked this time. I can put it there. Not that I need parentheses in the first place, just highlighting my substitution. The left most operation already have precedence in the first place.

You cannot just introduce parentheses into the formula, as there is no justification for introducing parentheses into the formula. Adding parentheses is a means of simplifying a formula, and that formula is already as simplified as it can be.

Well actually, addition have the property of associative.

That lets me move the + 1 around.

What I had wrong before hand was I place the brackets after an subtraction.

So, in all Christian charity, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume that you are really deficient in basic math skills.

So you are saying a + b - c isn't equal to (a + b) - c?

It is also equal to a + (b - c) and (-c + a) + b.

It doesn't matter where you put the parentheses in that equation, the answer remains the same.

What does that mean?

Parentheses are superfluous to the equation.

Unless, of course, you want to play a little shell game.

Ok. So now you get to play my little shell game.

∞ - ∞ + 1 = 0 + 1

(∞ - ∞) + 1 = 0 + 1

0 + 1 = 0 + 1

1 = 1

Well, waddayaknow!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyways, I think you better stop there, Bust. Now I am really believing that your purpose here is to deceive, which is not a good thought for me to have, and not a good thing for you to do (if that is what you are trying to do).