Help with my theory.

[Floatingsand]

Im no scientist or anything, so please dont be surprised if this post is lacking in a lot of logical things I am missing here, please correct me if that is the case.

So ive just logged into this forum and I need help on one of my theories.

The only thing I need to know if the following theory is true or not, both logically, and with actual evidence.

Ive seen this theory floating around about how with quantum fluctiations, in a theoredically infinite ammount of time, an infinite ammount of completely different things, both big and small, will all happen and infinite ammount of times. Just to confirm, is this true?

Edited June 26, 2023 by Floatingsand

[StringJunky]

46 minutes ago, Floatingsand said:

Im no scientist or anything, so please dont be surprised if this post is lacking in a lot of logical things I am missing here, please correct me if that is the case.

So ive just logged into this forum and I need help on one of my theories.

The only thing I need to know if the following theory is true or not, both logically, and with actual evidence.

Ive seen this theory floating around about how with quantum fluctiations, in a theoredically infinite ammount of time, an infinite ammount of completely different things, both big and small, will all happen and infinite ammount of times. Just to confirm, is this true?

No. There is isn't an infinite amount of things to interact for an infinite amount of time. I think most conventional scientists think the universe will experience 'Heat Death' eventually.... it may well basically turn into photons and dissipate in the expanding universe to no activity anywhere. Look up: Big Rip, Big Freeze and Big Crunch. These are the ways it could end up.

Edited June 26, 2023 by StringJunky

[Bufofrog]

8 hours ago, Floatingsand said:

Ive seen this theory floating

Do you have a citation or a website the describes this theory?

[HawkII]

12 hours ago, Floatingsand said:

Im no scientist or anything, so please dont be surprised if this post is lacking in a lot of logical things I am missing here, please correct me if that is the case.

So ive just logged into this forum and I need help on one of my theories.

The only thing I need to know if the following theory is true or not, both logically, and with actual evidence.

Ive seen this theory floating around about how with quantum fluctiations, in a theoredically infinite ammount of time, an infinite ammount of completely different things, both big and small, will all happen and infinite ammount of times. Just to confirm, is this true?

I remember that from a Maths Neflix film. I think it was about Blackholes. They showed a box with an apple inside it at one point.

[Bufofrog]

4 minutes ago, HawkII said:

I remember that from a Maths Neflix film. I think it was about Blackholes. They showed a box with an apple inside it at one point.

It seems that this theory you are alluding to is a half remembered comment from a Netflix movie, which is not much to go on.  I would hazard a guess that it is not a theory since you mention that infinite time and infinite 'things' are involved so it is not an idea that could be falsified.

[Phi for All]

12 hours ago, Floatingsand said:

Ive seen this theory floating around about how with quantum fluctiations, in a theoredically infinite ammount of time, an infinite ammount of completely different things, both big and small, will all happen and infinite ammount of times. Just to confirm, is this true?

Let's start out with a really key concept in science. "Theory" isn't a guess, it isn't even an educated guess. For something to be considered a theory, it starts as an hypothesis and goes through tons of observation, experimentation, analysis, prediction, and peer review. Then it has to stand up to every test it's put to, and when it can do that, we call it a theory. A theory is the strongest explanation science can offer. You don't just "come up with" a full-blown theory on your own.

"Theoretically" means "according to the assumed facts", which doesn't describe most people's ideas. It can also mean "untested, on paper only", but most scientists don't use it that way. It's popular with popular science writers and television writers though, so the word often gets misused.

And Bufofrog mentioned another key concept in science, falsifiability. In order for an hypothesis to progress, there must be a possibility that it's wrong, that it can be proven false in some way. Then we can test it to see if it consistently passes or if it fails even once. Anything involving infinities can't be falsified so we can't test it (we'll never have enough time or space or energy or density or whatever).

So this idea is unscientific. We have no way to disprove or support it using current methodology.

[swansont]

If you squint really hard the proposal resembles the ergodic hypothesis combined with the totalitarian principle

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergodic_hypothesis#:~:text=In physics and thermodynamics%2C the,a long period of time.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarian_principle

 

[HawkII]

6 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

It seems that this theory you are alluding to is a half remembered comment from a Netflix movie, which is not much to go on.  I would hazard a guess that it is not a theory since you mention that infinite time and infinite 'things' are involved so it is not an idea that could be falsified.

Ah yes but, if we think inside the box... the computer box... We can Simulate eternity

 

Netflix film; A trip to infinity

Apple in a box clip that OP is mentioning

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRiOi972nT8

 

Edited June 26, 2023 by HawkII

[Genady]

I don't think we can simulate eternity on computer.

[HawkII]

Super computers can get closer to eternity

[Genady]

"Closer to eternity"? You are always infinitely far from eternity, by definition.

Regardless of how you measure a "distance to eternity", super computers cannot simulate eternity either.