Infinity and our Existence

[rebelrunner26]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

hmm...ok. let me rephrase a bit. the bible =/= morality, which is what you're trying to prove to me, right? i agree. but the bible does present a moral code which was seen as the absolute law by many people for a long period of time, and still by some today. these morals were also presented through other texts (as in, other than christian texts), but these morals are still being applied to today's laws across the globe, regardless of if they came from the bible or another text or set of laws. earlier i was just using the bible and the u.s. as an example, but i do realize that it is different in other cultures.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

OK then. You recognize that the Bible was a product of moral thought rather than the other way around, right? In that case, you can't say that the Non-Christian texts are reducible to Biblical ideals, because it is actually the case that both Biblical thinking and other moral thinking share a common ancestry independent of both Christian and specific other texts.

The same thinking explains why we can look at the Codes of Hammurabi as marking the beginnings of legal thinking and of the rule of law, but we don't have to attribute all legal systems to Hammurabi, or even consider the codes to be morally correct.

[rebelrunner26]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

agreed.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

Right, insects represent a large exception. However insect aggression is usually tied to sexuality, whereas the basis of human aggression is still debated.

I believe ants and apes (maybe just chimpanzees, but I'll cover all bases in case) are the only species besides humans that engage in warfare (as coalitional intraspecific aggression). If other insects participate in such behavior, it's a rarity.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[rebelrunner26]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

i've heard that too...but we were just referring to killing in general, like eating mates and what not

[seltivo]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

What does ants killing each other have to do with infinity and our existence?
If you want to talk about the behavior of animals, make another thread. :P

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

It has to do with the "our existence" part.

[seltivo]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

o haha...


(sry for pointless post)

[dvann]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

No Matter How Large Or Small A Number It Is Still A Percentage Of Infinity Like 1 That Is Pratically Zero But It Not So Even Thought Infinty Is The Higest Number In The Univers Ecery Other Number Has A Above Zero Precentage Except For Zero.

[gnr61]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

Let Me Explain To You What You Are Saying If A Number Is A Percentage Of Infinity It Is A Fraction Of Infinity Which Implies That It Can Be Multiplied By Something To Equal Infinity Which Defies Some Basic Laws Of Mathematics.

[devonin]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

Also, whether gnr was just responding in the same way to prove a point or not, the 'Capitalizing Every Word' thing is incredibly annoying and poor communication, so you ought to try and not do it.

As for dvann's post: As gnr61 said, measurable numbers are not a fraction of infinity, because by its nature, infinity is not measurable.

There's an interesting question though...is 'infinity' technically a prime number? There are branches of mathematics that deal with differing sizes of infinities, such that one infinity could actually be larger than another, so it could be meaningful to say that the only factors of infinity are infinity and 1.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

How could infinity have factors? It doesn't seem like infinity can even have a fixed value, at least not a discernible one, meaning its only provable factor is itself by identity.

[gnr61]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

How could infinity have factors? It doesn't seem like infinity can even have a fixed value, at least not a discernible one, meaning its only provable factor is itself by identity.

Non-prime until proven otherwise.

[devonin]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

I'm referring here more to the Cantorian concept of transfinite numbers, and that there are sizes of infinities. Given sizes of infinity, I was half-joking that they qualified under the usual definition of primes, even though it would be impossible to prove.

[seltivo]

Re: Infinity and our Existence

Ignore this post. everything in it is (according to someone who sounds smarter that me) wrong.(see post 117)
____________________________________
If you multiply 1x2x3x4x...xn and then add one (I think it works if you subract one too, but I'm not shure), you will get a prime number. If, instead of stopping at n, you keep going to infinity, then add one you would get a prime number. This would make infinity prime.

However, even if infinity is prime, you gould just multiply it by two (not really changing much) and make it non prime.

This is where the whole "different sizes of infinity" thing comes in. In theory, multiplying infinity by two would give a larger infinity. But since infinity never ends, it would make sense that the second is no larger than the first.

So, it seems to me that some sizes of infinity are prime and some aren't.
How you would manage to tell them apart would be kinda confusing tough.

Another cool thing I thought I'd mention. There are (theoretically) infinitly more numbers between one and infinity than there are between one and zero. Yet, there is an infinite number of numbers between one and zero.

(If anything I said was wrong or didn't make sense, please tell me)