4 ms·
I would argue that "that's not a well-formed question" is a correct answer, not a non-answer. ...and that the intellectual thread you are pulling on is a (more
by bhk 3y ago
I would argue that "that's not a well-formed question" is a correct answer, not a non-answer.
...and that the intellectual thread you are pulling on is a (more) artificial notion, constructed by set theorists for the sake of set theorists, not for the sake of counting or measuring in any real sense.
- NineStarPoint 3y agoI’d disagree personally. The idea that you can add things to an infinite set, or multiply an infinite set are actually useful concepts. If you imagine the universe is infinite and as such has infinite stars in it (ω) you could discuss how some infinite universes have twice as much star density as our infinite universe (ω2). Or imagine taking a copy of our universe and adding a single star 10 light years from earth (ω+1). In a very real sense the second universe would have twice as much stuff in it as the first universe, even if you can countably map the two universes to each other. Or maybe put another way, taking the idea that infinity is just infinity makes a lot of sense when you’re primarily considering non-infinite numbers. When you’re primarily considering the concept of infinity and what you can do with it mathematically though, using systems that let you describe infinity with more nuance makes a lot of sense.