5 ms·

>Even though the universe is (probably) infinite, this does of course not mean that it is infinitely repetitive. If the universe is infinite and consists of ma

>Even though the universe is (probably) infinite, this does of course not mean that it is infinitely repetitive. If the universe is infinite and consists of matter, I think you can safely say every feasible combination of particles repeats, infinite number of times.

Sevrene 12y ago
Infinite sets does not equate to infinite possibility. Like you said, it only includes feasible combinations which is determined by our universe. If you roll a 6 sided die infinite times you will still never roll a 7. So there's never a universe where your body is composed of ice-cream, as sadly it is most likely impossible in this universe.
- macspoofing 12y ago
  >Like you said, it only includes feasible combinations which is determined by our universe What do you think I was arguing? The OP argued "Even though the universe is (probably) infinite, this does of course not mean that it is infinitely repetitive". 'Repetitive' by definition means a feasible combination of atoms.
mathattack 12y ago
This isn't necessarily true. The article largely explains it. The interaction of particles trends to infinity faster than time. Another way to think of it... Let's say that t is trending to infinity starting from 0. There are #s that will always be larger than t. Such as (t+1)^2. One more way... Time is one dimension. The rest of space-time is 3 (at least). The size of possibilities is larger to 3 orders of magnitude. And a last way... If it's feasible that matter can expand forever, then there's no way for the particles to repeat themselves. They just keep going and going...
- macspoofing 12y ago
  Stop time right now. You now have an static, unchanging, universe. This universe is infinite in size, and roughly equally dense with matter and radiation across this infinity. You really want to make the argument that there isn't another Earth out there?

Sevrene 12y ago

Infinite sets does not equate to infinite possibility. Like you said, it only includes feasible combinations which is determined by our universe. If you roll a 6 sided die infinite times you will still never roll a 7. So there's never a universe where your body is composed of ice-cream, as sadly it is most likely impossible in this universe.

macspoofing 12y ago
>Like you said, it only includes feasible combinations which is determined by our universe What do you think I was arguing? The OP argued "Even though the universe is (probably) infinite, this does of course not mean that it is infinitely repetitive". 'Repetitive' by definition means a feasible combination of atoms.

mathattack 12y ago

This isn't necessarily true. The article largely explains it. The interaction of particles trends to infinity faster than time. Another way to think of it... Let's say that t is trending to infinity starting from 0. There are #s that will always be larger than t. Such as (t+1)^2. One more way... Time is one dimension. The rest of space-time is 3 (at least). The size of possibilities is larger to 3 orders of magnitude. And a last way... If it's feasible that matter can expand forever, then there's no way for the particles to repeat themselves. They just keep going and going...

macspoofing 12y ago
Stop time right now. You now have an static, unchanging, universe. This universe is infinite in size, and roughly equally dense with matter and radiation across this infinity. You really want to make the argument that there isn't another Earth out there?