True. We cannot jump out of consciousness if it is all there is. It has been equated with God as God being all there is. So if consciousness is God and God is consciousness that solves the so-called hard problem of consciousness for philosophers. They can move on to mind. Is it elemental and does it emerge with quantum events?
What about physical infinity? Accepting infinity, e.g. of time, being VASTLY longer (= fundamentally different) than just "very very very long," all kinds of crazy seeming outcomes become possible. Even the probability of something like the current arrangement of atoms, i.e. the return to a past long gone, has a certain (tiny but non-zero) probability. And so if you have the luxury of waiting FOREVER it must finally happen. On the other hand, there is the (somewhat strangely named) "intuitionist math" asserting that real numbers are not "real." I think I like this idea. Infinite decimals are not needed in our physical world, and might be unrealistic due to other phenomena often taking over when you get "too close," just like models breaking down when used with no regard for their limits of usability.
There is either infinity or none, let it be superimposed by the idea, that if universe had a beginning and therefore had to have an end, even a universe with a good algorithm to solve all complexity or count a presumingly infinite set to the end, had no time to do so if its calculator was digital. On the other hand if it's analog, it itself could have an intuition, and here we are. If the Universe has no end, while we still want it to begin with the big bang, the beginning must belong to a cycle, where the seemingly end is none, but a beginning of a new cycle. If there is a memory plane between the cycles, it could be or had to be felt near infinite by complexity and multiverses had to exist. I believe they can communicate with each other and hold mutual or/and exclusive information about the other. I ask myself if the thermodynamics of ideas has to do something with time, and if the amount of time is of positive, negative and neutral nature or if there is a field where they occur all at once. There is a field rushing through my head, passing through me rather like neutrinos rarely touching me but its impulse waves and crests do. Our Universe is said to be 13.77 Billion years old. Therefore even pi is not written down yet but already has a function. If the universe is of cyclical nature, entropy at the end is equal to the entropy in the beginning and at the same time it had to be alive by definition.
27:17 apropos infinite suitcases: it reminds me of a joke a prof told in an undergrad math class: "Prove by induction that an infinite number of socks fits in a suitcase. Base case: Clearly, you can fit a single sock. Induction step: No matter how full the suitcase, you can always fit one more sock." [Of course this aims to prove something about potential infinity (arbitrary number of socks), not actual infinity, but it sounds better that way.]
44:00 the best intuitive explanation for the expansion of an already spatially Infinite Universe is the Chessboard analogy: Just imagine a spatially infinite, extended flat surface with a chessboard drawn on it. Close to the beginning ( Big Bang) the squares of the chessboard are infinitesimally small ( although the whole surface is always infinite). As time goes by and the geometry of the surface expands, all squares become bigger and bigger ( the scale factor grows). That's all.
Its always lovely to listen Frenkel. I think infinity does not exist, before and after reality there must be a "no time" environment that every person who had an NDE (reality or illusion) tells about. even because infinity backward cannot exist. only a eternal "now" can be accepted by the consciousness... That was well explained by a priest who had an NDE (and again it does not matter if NDE are real metaphysical experiences or hallucinations) , he said that here time is like something that proceed on the side of a stick , while there is like watching through the stick , top to bottom.
It is sloppy to call the actual infinity set N to be larger than any finite set. ∞ is not measurable due to its unending nature by definition. "Largeness", (Size) entails measurement or observation, relative or absolute. Infinite regression or extrapolation in measurement voids incremental size or duration (Zeno's Paradox). This contradiction prohibits infinity to be compared to finitude, and thus makes talk of size to be incomprehensible.
We absolutely can compare finite sets to infinite sets. There is an injective map from any finite set to the set N of natural numbers, but there are no injective maps from N to any finite set. Therefore, the cardinality of N is strictly larger than the cardinality of any finite set. QED
We always need to keep in mind that infinity, represented by a special symbol in mathematics, is not a number, perhaps for a very good reason that relates not only to mathematics but also to rationality and language. This lecture is problematic in several ways. It combines some mathematical notions with poorly tackled epistemological considerations and amateur philosophical analyses. People should stick to what they know; being a great mathematician is not a license to speak about other disciplines. The nature of reality is not an easy subject. For anyone interested in the relationship between language and reality in the Greek philosophical tradition (not confinded to of its Classical period), the works of Prof. Christos Giannaras (also spelled "Yannaras") are a very good starting point.
Much Ado About Nothing!!! How can anyone talk on the subject of 'Infinity' without the knowledge of the Sanskrit word "Brahman", whose meaning itself is "That which keeps extending"??? Zen philosophy has come out of this very concept! The philosophy of SHOONYA, (Zero), out of which manifests ANANTA, (That which has no end), i.e. Ever Expanding Finite!!!
@@hannesunterweger5787 Ich habe ihn auch verstanden. Aber, ehrlich gesagt, sogar für mich, für Ukrainer, also für den, wer kein Muttersprachler ist, klingte das einbischen komisch=) But for foreigner, one must admit, he speaks quite well...
“A fish cannot be aware of the ocean, before jumping out of water.”
True. We cannot jump out of consciousness if it is all there is. It has been equated with God as God being all there is. So if consciousness is God and God is consciousness that solves the so-called hard problem of consciousness for philosophers. They can move on to mind. Is it elemental and does it emerge with quantum events?
Infinity is real
What about physical infinity? Accepting infinity, e.g. of time, being VASTLY longer (= fundamentally different) than just "very very very long," all kinds of crazy seeming outcomes become possible. Even the probability of something like the current arrangement of atoms, i.e. the return to a past long gone, has a certain (tiny but non-zero) probability. And so if you have the luxury of waiting FOREVER it must finally happen. On the other hand, there is the (somewhat strangely named) "intuitionist math" asserting that real numbers are not "real." I think I like this idea. Infinite decimals are not needed in our physical world, and might be unrealistic due to other phenomena often taking over when you get "too close," just like models breaking down when used with no regard for their limits of usability.
There is either infinity or none, let it be superimposed by the idea, that if universe had a beginning and therefore had to have an end, even a universe with a good algorithm to solve all complexity or count a presumingly infinite set to the end, had no time to do so if its calculator was digital. On the other hand if it's analog, it itself could have an intuition, and here we are.
If the Universe has no end, while we still want it to begin with the big bang, the beginning must belong to a cycle, where the seemingly end is none, but a beginning of a new cycle. If there is a memory plane between the cycles, it could be or had to be felt near infinite by complexity and multiverses had to exist. I believe they can communicate with each other and hold mutual or/and exclusive information about the other.
I ask myself if the thermodynamics of ideas has to do something with time, and if the amount of time is of positive, negative and neutral nature or if there is a field where they occur all at once. There is a field rushing through my head, passing through me rather like neutrinos rarely touching me but its impulse waves and crests do.
Our Universe is said to be 13.77 Billion years old. Therefore even pi is not written down yet but already has a function.
If the universe is of cyclical nature, entropy at the end is equal to the entropy in the beginning and at the same time it had to be alive by definition.
Err…that are argument is somewhat…circular ;)
Excellent presentation, thanks for sharing.
27:17 apropos infinite suitcases: it reminds me of a joke a prof told in an undergrad math class: "Prove by induction that an infinite number of socks fits in a suitcase. Base case: Clearly, you can fit a single sock. Induction step: No matter how full the suitcase, you can always fit one more sock." [Of course this aims to prove something about potential infinity (arbitrary number of socks), not actual infinity, but it sounds better that way.]
funny how he gets so deep at the end and then a men in a bathrobe appears on stage ...
It's a lab coat, not a bath robe! :D
I think the only place the infinity can exist is in Zero (0) like Zero Infinity.
maybe thats why you get the infinity symbol when you twist the 0...
@@mathemitnullplan, Each point in space contains both of them, and it is the origin of the entire universe.
"Let's accept that the Seth exists." - No thanks. ;)
44:00 the best intuitive explanation for the expansion of an already spatially Infinite Universe is the Chessboard analogy:
Just imagine a spatially infinite, extended flat surface with a chessboard drawn on it.
Close to the beginning ( Big Bang) the squares of the chessboard are infinitesimally small ( although the whole surface is always infinite).
As time goes by and the geometry of the surface expands, all squares become bigger and bigger ( the scale factor grows).
That's all.
Its always lovely to listen Frenkel. I think infinity does not exist, before and after reality there must be a "no time" environment that every person who had an NDE (reality or illusion) tells about. even because infinity backward cannot exist. only a eternal "now" can be accepted by the consciousness... That was well explained by a priest who had an NDE (and again it does not matter if NDE are real metaphysical experiences or hallucinations) , he said that here time is like something that proceed on the side of a stick , while there is like watching through the stick , top to bottom.
It is sloppy to call the actual infinity set N to be larger than any finite set. ∞ is not measurable due to its unending nature by definition. "Largeness", (Size) entails measurement or observation, relative or absolute. Infinite regression or extrapolation in measurement voids incremental size or duration (Zeno's Paradox). This contradiction prohibits infinity to be compared to finitude, and thus makes talk of size to be incomprehensible.
We absolutely can compare finite sets to infinite sets. There is an injective map from any finite set to the set N of natural numbers, but there are no injective maps from N to any finite set. Therefore, the cardinality of N is strictly larger than the cardinality of any finite set. QED
We always need to keep in mind that infinity, represented by a special symbol in mathematics, is not a number, perhaps for a very good reason that relates not only to mathematics but also to rationality and language. This lecture is problematic in several ways. It combines some mathematical notions with poorly tackled epistemological considerations and amateur philosophical analyses. People should stick to what they know; being a great mathematician is not a license to speak about other disciplines. The nature of reality is not an easy subject. For anyone interested in the relationship between language and reality in the Greek philosophical tradition (not confinded to of its Classical period), the works of Prof. Christos Giannaras (also spelled "Yannaras") are a very good starting point.
I wish Edward studied Nikola Tesla
Much Ado About Nothing!!!
How can anyone talk on the subject of 'Infinity' without the knowledge of the Sanskrit word "Brahman", whose meaning itself is "That which keeps extending"??? Zen philosophy has come out of this very concept! The philosophy of SHOONYA, (Zero), out of which manifests ANANTA, (That which has no end), i.e. Ever Expanding Finite!!!
Infinity is real, but they should stop using it in math equations,
because it's not a number.
it's not used as a number
Please work on your English. I can't play this 15 times every min. You can be an Einstein but if no one can understand you then you're nothing
I am austrian with average english skills and I can understand Edward crystal clear- work und your understanding and you will be fine
@@hannesunterweger5787 Ich habe ihn auch verstanden. Aber, ehrlich gesagt, sogar für mich, für Ukrainer, also für den, wer kein Muttersprachler ist, klingte das einbischen komisch=) But for foreigner, one must admit, he speaks quite well...
What is wrong with you? Frustrated with your life?
@@ramkmeno I was frustrated with his accent not my life.
@@qshakoor you have a long way to go to grow up as a human being. At some point in your life you will realize how narrow minded you were.