4 ms·
I am not a mathematician, but I know that at least in standard mathematics it is fairly ill-advised to treat infinity implicitly as a number. Doing so can resul
by peter30744 8y ago
I am not a mathematician, but I know that at least in standard mathematics it is fairly ill-advised to treat infinity implicitly as a number. Doing so can result in various contradictions (two different seemingly valid solutions to a problem). It should be thought of as a property of a process, i.e. for any number x you can change the process so that it results in a number greater than x. One example of infinity might be: "Think of a number which you are allowed to change after each number I suggest. If for any number I suggest you change it for a bigger one, then what you think of is infinity."
Chapter 15: Paradoxes of probability theory in Jaynes's "Probability Theory: Logic of Science" is a great reading on the topic (you can find a pdf easily on google). It starts with a quote from Gauss:
"I protest against the use of infinite magnitude as something accomplished, which is never permissible in mathematics. Infinity is merely a figure of speech, the true meaning being a limit." -- C. F. Gauss
Anyway, there are plenty of theories in mathematics which use infinity implicitly, but one should perhaps be cautious.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- enedil 8y agoNow you're conflating two different notions. You're (and your quotes) are talking about the first bullet point from the article. In turn, when taking about the last one, the one chosen by article author, from my experience, I'd say that it's beneficial not to even consider it in time, i.e. don't think about it as process, don't think of it as something completed. There's no completion, since there was no process to begin with. The object just is, and we can manipulate it according to the rules.