New Scientist vs. William Lane Craig on infinity explanations

_{Denyse O'Leary

March 25, 2016

Cosmology, Mathematics, News}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Not to start up the infinity battle again (okay, maybe we are … ), from New Scientist:

Explanimator: Does infinity exist in the real world?

…

Some mathematicians are trying to rebuild the foundations of mathematics without the infinite. But if there is a biggest number, what would happen when you add one to it? The solution could be thinking of numbers as a cycle rather than a linear series, some sort of loop where you revert back to the beginning. It’s a little strange, but then so is infinity. More.

The reader who forwarded the tip comments, “Compared to William Lane Craig’s lectures, this article seems shallow and infantile.”

Here’s Craig. Readers can decide:

See also: Durston and Craig on an infinite temporal past

and

Infinity at Starbucks: Starring Laszlo Bencze and Art Battson

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

"According to Einstein's doctrine the world is a finite four dimensional sphere full with force-lines. No motion is possible in it since time is one of its geometrical dimensions, and there is no external time." Source: Methodologia (pdf) by Dr. Uri Fidelman.
Why is the physics community allowed to continue with its lies? Why are we giving this bunch of con artists billions of dollars of our hard earned money to come up with more BS results that will never benefit the taxpayers? PS. We, the taxpayers, should form a legal fund and take the thieves to court. We can win this.Mapou_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
12:05 PM
12
12
05
PM
PDT}

Who among the dirt worshippers who comment on UD is willing to contradict Karl Popper's contention that Einstein's spacetime is a block universe in which nothing happens, not even gravitational waves? Go ahead and put your crackpottery where your mouth is. Come on out and state your case and watch me shoot it down.Mapou_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
11:51 AM
11
11
51
AM
PDT}

By the way, Aleta, what does the Flying Dirt Monster's asteroid smell like today? ahahaha...AHAHAHA...Mapou_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
11:42 AM
11
11
42
AM
PDT}

Aleta, If I am a crackpot in your eyes, I consider it a badge of honor. I would rather be on the side of Karl Popper than some inconsequential dirt worshipper proselytizing on UD. LOLMapou_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
11:40 AM
11
11
40
AM
PDT}

You, Mapou, are a first-class crackpot. But I'm not calling you a liar, because if one truly believes one's fallacious ideas, one isn't lying when one states them.Aleta_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
11:00 AM
11
11
00
AM
PDT}

Aleta, are you calling Karl Popper a crackpot? Or are you calling yourself a crackpot? All dirt-worshipping atheists/Darwinists are liars and crackpots. It's genetic. LOLMapou_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
10:44 AM
10
10
44
AM
PDT}

To quote Mapou,
Crackpot.
Aleta_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
10:33 AM
10
10
33
AM
PDT}

Crackpot atheists on UD love to talk about the mathematics of spacetime as a way to show off:
Topology is one of the weirder areas of pure mathematics but it’s very good at modelling Einsteinian space-time.
But, amazingly, not one of the dirt worshippers ever mentions that spacetime is a block universe in which nothing happens. This nasty little truth about spacetime is well-known to those few who truly understand the stupidity of Einsteinian physics but it doesn't stop the crackpots from talking about gravitational waves (spacetime ripples) traveling through spacetime at the speed of light. Only the physics community and evolutionary biology somehow get away with feeding the public with blatant crackpottery. Read it and weep.
"There is no dynamics within space-time itself: nothing ever moves therein; nothing happens; nothing changes. [...] In particular, one does not think of particles as "moving through" space-time, or as "following along" their world-lines. Rather, particles are just "in" space-time, once and for all, and the world-line represents, all at once the complete life history of the particle." Source: Relativity from A to B by Dr. Robert Geroch, U. of Chicago

"At the same time I realized that such myths may be developed, and become testable; that historically speaking all — or very nearly all — scientific theories originate from myths, and that a myth may contain important anticipations of scientific theories. Examples are Empedocles' theory of evolution by trial and error, or Parmenides' myth of the unchanging block universe in which nothing ever happens and which, if we add another dimension, becomes Einstein's block universe (in which, too, nothing ever happens, since everything is, four-dimensionally speaking, determined and laid down from the beginning). I thus felt that if a theory is found to be non-scientific, or "metaphysical" (as we might say), it is not thereby found to be unimportant, or insignificant, or "meaningless," or "nonsensical." But it cannot claim to be backed by empirical evidence in the scientific sense — although it may easily be, in some genetic sense, the "result of observation." Source: Conjectures and Refutations by Karl Popper. Emphasis added.
We are being lied to by the high priests of the physics community. We are being ripped off by crooks and con artists in high places who look down on us condescendingly. We, the public who pays their salaries, need to wake up and ask for our money back. We need the prosecute the thieves and the liars and lock them up. It's not nice to fool the entire world and nobody should be allowed to get away with it.Mapou_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
10:21 AM
10
10
21
AM
PDT}

KF,
The issue is, is such a claim coherent, and I am arguing no it tries to end the endless in cumulative finite stage steps.
As I stated in the other thread, it's actually a matter of "ending the beginningless", which is not contradictory.daveS_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
06:43 AM
6
06
43
AM
PDT}

PS: The pivot of debate is, many do not agree that there was a beginning to the physical world, and now appeal to multiverse models. The issue is, is such a claim coherent, and I am arguing no it tries to end the endless in cumulative finite stage steps.kairosfocus_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
04:54 AM
4
04
54
AM
PDT}

F/N: I pick back up: https://uncommondescent.com/atheism/durston-and-craig-on-an-infinite-temporal-past/#comment-601594 In a day or so the budget silly season will be past. KF PS: ijk vectors and complex numbers are very useful, and even root -1 too. I add that for several years I more lived in the complex frequency domain than in the temporal one and was forever pole spotting for transfer functions. Insofar as the relevant structures and quantities are realistic or real, the logic of such constrains empirical observable reality. This I discuss in the linked.kairosfocus_{March 27, 2016
March
03
Mar
27
27
2016
04:45 AM
4
04
45
AM
PDT}

Aleta #36 & 38 I think your comments are very important: applied mathematics is not the same thing as pure mathematics. But a lot of applied mathematics makes use of some very odd and obtuse results and structures. Topology is one of the weirder areas of pure mathematics but it's very good at modelling Einsteinian space-time. Complex numbers have some very good and concrete applications in the real world because, as you say, they help separate physical effects into basis vectors. I couldn't believe it at first when I took a complex analysis course.ellazimm_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
11:59 PM
11
11
59
PM
PDT}

Complex numbers are just two dimensional vectors. "imaginary" is a terrible name for i: imaginary numbers are no more, and no less, "imaginary" than real numbers are. Complex numbers are commonly used in many fields, and are tremendously important. As with all applied mathematics, the essential point is to model a real-world phenomena with appropriate mathematical concepts, and then to test the model by seeng whether the implications of the math are borne out by the real world. If so, the model is strengthened, if not, you refine the model.Aleta_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
06:43 PM
6
06
43
PM
PDT}

Mapau @ 32. Thank you. Aleta @ 36, Thanks for clarifying. I won't try to digress. The topic is infinity but just one small comment on sqrt(-1). I justify it by asserting the comment does seem to relate to real world things. There are a few people who speculate that quantum information is a complex entity. If this is so, our world is full of 'imaginary' entities (I consider 'imaginary' an unfortunate name. In many realms imaginary numbers are as real as real numbers). I think the idea is that instead of two electron spin states there are really four, two of which are readily observable. This topic is marked for future study by me because, like Mapau, I cannot currently envision what a complex information bit would be like. But I am comfortable working with complex numbers in other areas, and although I cannot envision a complex information bit, it does seem to resolve some of the spooky action at a distance questions. Anyway, regarding infinity it does seem there are no real world examples.GBDixon_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
05:49 PM
5
05
49
PM
PDT}

I'll also make a point that has been avoided so far: that all these arguments about time are assuming discrete events, as they are modeled by the natural numbers (or integers). If we model time as a continuous flow, (e.g, as the reals) there are an infinite number of "events" every second. Again, the point that is not being discussed here is the difference between the mathematics itself and the use of the mathematics to model a real-world phenomena. In general, models are always useful approximations that may or may not be accurate, or may or may not be misleading.Aleta_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
04:29 PM
4
04
29
PM
PDT}

dave asks, "Did anyone else watch the WLC video ." Well, I just did. Looks like ground that we've gone over thoroughly before. I certainly agree, and have from the beginning, that no actual infinite number of things exists in the real world. I also think that we all agree that our universe had a beginning, so the question of an infinite past for our universe is irrelevant. And, as I've pointed out, it is a totally unwarranted metaphysical speculation to think that the mathematical number line might be an accurate model of time as it is outside and beyond our universe, or even time as we know it in our universe has any metaphysical analog at all. And I found Craig a bit annoying as a speaker - reminded be a bit of Vizzini in the Princess Bride.Aleta_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
03:26 PM
3
03
26
PM
PDT}

Me_Think:
Mapou @ 16
In the foreseeable future, when our knowledge will have increased and physicists finally wake up from their stupor, we will develop technologies that will allow us to travel instantly from anywhere to anywhere without going through the intervening positions
That’s possible only via a wormhole (Einstein-Rosen bridges) or by going into higher dimension. Which of those two do you believe in?
The wormhole concept is Star-Trek voodoo physics created by clueless crackpots in the physics community who never learned the truth about spacetime being a block universe in which nothing happens. Karl Popper and many others told them about this inconvenient little truth many years ago but the crackpots love their little crackpot world too much to give it up. So they keep perpetuating the lie. And why shouldn't they? It's a cash cow to them. Also, the public just love being fleeced by the likes of Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne and the entire physics community. They just can't have enough of the time travel, gravitational wave and wormhole fairy tales. If distance does not exist (it doesn't), we live in a nonspatial reality. This means that the position of a particle is not a property of space but an intrinsic property of the particle itself, just like mass, charge or any other intrinsic property. Ordinary motion consists of changing the particle's positional property to an adjacent value. There is no reason, however, that the position of a particle cannot be changed by an arbitrary value. I expect that, one day in the not too distant future, when the physics community finally take their heads out of their asteroids, we will find a way to do just that. Imagine being able to move instantly from New York to Beijing or from earth to the moon or to Mars. It will be a different world, to say the least. In a way, reality is not unlike a 3D video game. The software objects in the game do not move anywhere in memory. Only their positional properties change. Just saying. Take it or leave it. PS. To those of the Christian persuasion, there is a story in the New Testament that mentions instantaneous teleportation.Mapou_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
11:41 AM
11
11
41
AM
PDT}

Mung at 25:
I don’t believe I exist, and I think I can prove it.
Wow, that's a new one for me. What religion is this from?GaryGaulin_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
10:46 AM
10
10
46
AM
PDT}

GBDixon @27:
Mapau @ 22: I’m sorry if I offended you.
My apologies. I mistook you for someone else.Mapou_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
10:36 AM
10
10
36
AM
PDT}

J-Mac @ 29
Obviously… or one would have to 2 of himself…a clone.
Obviously, but what is left behind is imperfect broken clone . Neither the transported quantum state nor the left over quantum state will be complete. You would destroy the original and still will not get a complete replica at the other end.
I’m not sure you understand the issue… Quantum entanglement is what would make teleportation possible. Watch this video on the 40 min mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbIcg0XsbFQ Maybe then you will understand what I’m talking about…
I understand the issue quite well :-) .What you need to understand is popular videos are hype- not the truth. What gets transported over quantum entanglement is the quantum information contained in one photon not the photon itself, and no the photons were not created at the other end- it was used to set up another photon. This is how the actual experiment works: Alice and Charlie* are in La Palma, and Bob in Tenerife. Charlie prepares teleportation input photon in a state using HSP (Heralded single-photon) source with a trigger photon 0. An Einstein Podolsky Rosen source generates an entangled pair of photons 2 and 3. Alice then performs a Bell-state measurement on photons1 and 2 and projects them onto two of the four Bell states and sends the result via the classical feed-forward channel to Bob. Photon 3 is sent via the free-space quantum channel to Bob, who applies a unitary transformation on photon 3 depending on the BSM result and thus turns its state into a replica of the initial quantum state. Note: Alice , Bob and Charlie are placeholder names usMe_Think_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
09:40 AM
9
09
40
AM
PDT}

Here's an attempt to modify the Hilbert Hotel to illustrate the distinction I'm making above in #28. This hotel consists of just a single room. The hotel is ``beginningless'' in the WLC sense. Guests stay at the hotel one at a time, for one night only. Let's assume the hotel has been fully booked throughout an infinite past, so you would think there is no vacancy. Could the hotel have accommodated one extra guest? Could it have accommodated (countably) infinitely many extra guests? Yes, just as in the original Hilbert Hotel.daveS_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
08:08 AM
8
08
08
AM
PDT}

Me_Think, "...but you have to destroy the original body to know the quantum states of the body... Obviously... or one would have to 2 of himself...a clone. "Quantum entanglement is completely different. It has nothing to do with transportation of states.When the initially entangled particles are separated by an arbitrary distance, it is still governed by a single wave equation so when you measure a quantum state in one particle, the corresponding state in the other particles collapses to the alternate state. Thus if the first particle is measured to have a clockwise spin, the other particle will collapse to have a counterclockwise spin. I'm not sure you understand the issue... Quantum entanglement is what would make teleportation possible. Watch this video on the 40 min mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbIcg0XsbFQ Maybe then you will understand what I'm talking about...J-Mac_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
08:02 AM
8
08
02
AM
PDT}

Did anyone else watch the WLC video and find it unconvincing? He in essence says that the Hilbert Hotel is strange, therefore it cannot exist. Well, a lot of modern physics is strange, but apparently it describes things that actually exist. Moreover, I think that the two examples of candidate actual infinities that he discusses: 1) a hotel with infinitely many rooms, and 2) the set of all past events, are a bit different. The infinitely many rooms in Hilbert's Hotel must exist all at once, while the events in the past exist only finitely many at a time. I find an infinite past to be less problematic than an actually infinite physical object, so I'm not convinced that absurdities in the Hilbert Hotel ``prove'' that an infinite past is impossible.daveS_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
07:31 AM
7
07
31
AM
PDT}

Mapau @ 22: I'm sorry if I offended you.GBDixon_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
07:25 AM
7
07
25
AM
PDT}

J-Mac @ 24
There is a third possibility; teleportation.
Teleportation works by transferring the quantum state from one position to another, but there is something called No Cloning theorem - you can't copy the quantum states of arbitrary body. What is possible is imperfect cloning , but you have to destroy the original body to know the quantum states of the body even then you will get only the macro states which is why teleportation is not considered a viable method.
Quantum entanglement allows for instantaneous transfer of quantum state of the entangled particles.
Quantum entanglement is completely different. It has nothing to do with transportation of states.When the initially entangled particles are separated by an arbitrary distance, it is still governed by a single wave equation so when you measure a quantum state in one particle, the corresponding state in the other particles collapses to the alternate state. Thus if the first particle is measured to have a clockwise spin, the other particle will collapse to have a counterclockwise spin.Me_Think_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
07:19 AM
7
07
19
AM
PDT}

I don't believe I exist, and I think I can prove it.Mung_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
06:43 AM
6
06
43
AM
PDT}

Me_think @23 There is a third possibility; teleportation. Quantum entanglement allows for instantaneous transfer of quantum state of the entangled particles. Although you may not believe that, the bible has more than one example of teleportation; when angles materialized human bodies and ate with Abraham... for example.J-Mac_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
05:13 AM
5
05
13
AM
PDT}

Mapou @ 16
In the foreseeable future, when our knowledge will have increased and physicists finally wake up from their stupor, we will develop technologies that will allow us to travel instantly from anywhere to anywhere without going through the intervening positions
That's possible only via a wormhole (Einstein-Rosen bridges) or by going into higher dimension. Which of those two do you believe in?Me_Think_{March 26, 2016
March
03
Mar
26
26
2016
01:35 AM
1
01
35
AM
PDT}

GBDixon:
Time to stop using your cell phone and computer, for design techniques employing both sqrt(-1) and infinities permeate the designs of these devices.
Funny. Both my cell phone and my computer are discrete and finite machines. I can assure you that neither of them contains either infinities or sqrt(-1). And since none of the computers that were used to design my computer and my cell phone have either infinities or sqrt(-1) in them, I am rather confident that you are pulling your lies out of your nether regions. See you around.Mapou_{March 25, 2016
March
03
Mar
25
25
2016
11:38 PM
11
11
38
PM
PDT}

Mapau @ 18 Time to stop using your cell phone and computer, for design techniques employing both sqrt(-1) and infinities permeate the designs of these devices. Luckily, for those of us who find these concepts useful, useful work is done. They still work despite your lack of belief in imaginary numbers and infinity. Don't forget the maths are merely symbolic representations of real world things and in the sense they are symbolic none of it has any reality per your definition. But math, including your difficult pieces, sure is handy.GBDixon_{March 25, 2016
March
03
Mar
25
25
2016
11:31 PM
11
11
31
PM
PDT}

Prev 1 2 3 4 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply