Philosophy Now Forum

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 5:28 pm

-1- wrote: ↑Thu Aug 06, 2020 6:46 am If you go, say, 100 numbers a day, each day, then in inifinite number of days you can cover the entire length of the number progression. Your reasoning fails because you can't imagine that it can be done. It is your own limitation of reasoning power or imagination that renders the task impossible, not the inherent impossibility of the task itself.

Dumb Philosopher. If you aren't going to change your mind when you are provided with counter-examples to your claims, then fuck off and die already.

If you had infinite time you will ONLY count the integers.
You will not be able to count the real numbers.

You don't actually understand the difference between countable and uncountable infinities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard%2 ... escription

Not gonna look at your wiki link, but something tells me, when dealing with infinity, numbers are un-accountable - integer or otherwise.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:01 pm Not gonna look at your wiki link, but something tells me, when dealing with infinity, numbers are un-accountable - integer or otherwise.

Integers are countable. 1..2..3..4. Adding 1 gets you to the next one.

What's the next real number after 0 ?

An infinity is classed as countable if there is one to one correspondence between it and the integers
For uncountable infinities no such correspondence exists because they are greater than the integers

Aleph null is a countable infinity [ infinite set of the natural numbers ]
Anything above that such as aleph one [ infinite set of the ordinals ] is an uncountable infinity [ more ordinals than integers ]

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:03 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:01 pm Not gonna look at your wiki link, but something tells me, when dealing with infinity, numbers are un-accountable - integer or otherwise.

Integers are countable. 1..2..3..4. Adding 1 gets you to the next one.

What's the next real number after 0 ?

Sure, rattling around in the back of my head was you wouldn't get much past 1 starting at 1. My point was that you would never get to infinity with integers anyway, otherwise it isn't infinity.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 1:36 am Sure, rattling around in the back of my head was you wouldn't get much past 1 starting at 1. My point was that you would never get to infinity with integers anyway, otherwise it isn't infinity.

You never get to infinity because infinity isn't a destination.

With integers - you make progress.
With real numbers you can't even get started.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 7:00 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 1:36 am Sure, rattling around in the back of my head was you wouldn't get much past 1 starting at 1. My point was that you would never get to infinity with integers anyway, otherwise it isn't infinity.

You never get to infinity because infinity isn't a destination.

With integers - you make progress.
With real numbers you can't even get started.

But i'm going to count in 1.5s

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 10:07 am But i'm going to count in 1.5s

So you don't want to count any numbers between 0 and 1?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 10:12 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 10:07 am But i'm going to count in 1.5s

So you don't want to count any numbers between 0 and 1?

No thanks.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Aug 08, 2020 2:51 pm

-1- wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 8:30 amI almost died one day due to a heart attack by reading the incredibly stupoid posts here by incredibly stupid people.

Well that was a stupid thing to do wasn’t it. Why would you be so stupid as to do something like that?

Finally I can agree on something with someone on this laughing stock of philosophy forum. Stupid is what stupid does, said very aptly Forrest Gump. I can be shown as a prime example of that.

Ginkgo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:46 am
Don't forget, the Big Bang was not an explosion, it was an expansion...Remember? An explosion occurs in space while an expansion is the creation of space.

The BB is not actually the creation of space. The theory holds that "things" existed prior to the BB, such as gases and plasma. So it's not the original explanation of the universe, meaning "all things that ever existed," just a latter stage of it.

But it won't matter anyway. An infinite causal regress is both mathematically and empirically impossible, so it's impossible as evaluated by either of those two ways.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 5:28 pm You don't actually understand the difference between countable and uncountable infinities.

You need to understand the term "actual infinite regress of causes." It's not just mathematically impossible, it's empirically impossible as well.

Go and get yourself an infinite number of toothpicks. Put one on your kitchen table, then try to set another before it, and another before that, and call me back when you've finished the sequence.

So you don't even need to refer to integers at all to run the test.

Regarding "Is God Necessary for Morality?"

I love my God. I don't like Immanuel Can's God. But I love my God and I wish to God I could be more like Him.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:20 am You need to understand the term "actual infinite regress of causes." It's not just mathematically impossible, it's empirically impossible as well.

I understand this very well. So well in fact, that it's trivial for me to point out that you don't.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:20 am Go and get yourself an infinite number of toothpicks.

If infinities are empirically impossible, how the hell would I do that? Perhaps you can explain to us what experiencing infinitely many toothpicks might be like?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:20 am Put one on your kitchen table, then try to set another before it, and another before that, and call me back when you've finished the sequence.

In a universe that contains infinitely many toothpicks, you think there's any space for a kitchen table?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:20 am So you don't even need to refer to integers at all to run the test.

If you don't even need the integers, then why are you referring to countable things, like toothpicks?

Q.E.D you don't understand that there is a difference.

You can start counting integers, but you'll never finish the task.
You can't even start counting the real numbers. What real number comes after 0?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 11:06 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:20 am Go and get yourself an infinite number of toothpicks.

If infinities are empirically impossible, how the hell would I do that? Perhaps you can explain to us what experiencing infinitely many toothpicks might be like?

Now you're getting it!

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:20 am Put one on your kitchen table, then try to set another before it, and another before that, and call me back when you've finished the sequence.

In a universe that contains infinitely many toothpicks, you think there's any space for a kitchen table?

Now you're getting it for sure!

But in an infinite universe, there would be both absolute room AND no room for an infinite number of toothpicks. See the mathematical exercise called Hilbert's Hotel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faQBrAQ87l4

QED.