Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Syntho-sis

Infinity... Can God conceive it?

Recommended Posts

Here's a paradox for you.

 

By definition the "infinite" is a substance without bounds, endless. Having no conceivable end. If it does have an ending it isn't infinite.

 

So can a super intelligent being who created the universe and all of its laws "count" to infinity? An entity who is by common thought, an infinitely powerful being.

 

Think about it... Can the infinite-conscious be aware of itself to it's fullest extent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Moved to general discussion.)

 

I'd say "an infinitely powerful being" is not an intelligible concept, so the question is meaningless. Others, obviously, will disagree. It could also be meaningless in the same way that "irresistible force meets immovable object" is meaningless, i.e. that the existence of one precludes the existence of the other, by definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That concept is really trying to take our minds that work within the confines of causality and think out the "causality" behind something that created causality in the first place, which by definition would have to supersede it. For the first question, I would guess the answer is yes, since if something could create infinite space/time, it would probably appear finite from it's perspective in some way.

 

Second question: rationally, no consciousness can be aware of itself completely because consciousness is a side effect of memory patterns that reflect data (among more complex factors) and to be conscious of that data, we cannot be conscious of the memory patterns that create that awareness. We have to "see" the meaning in the data, not the raw storage pattern of bits. If we want to be aware of the raw storage pattern, we need additional patterns of memory and processing power to abstract those, which increases our "extent" and thus gives us yet more "subconscious" - hence consciousness cannot exist without a subconscious aspect to the program.

 

That said, you say "infinite-consciousness" which from our perspective in this little universe may be a total oxymoron and complete impossibility. If this universe is the result of factors in a greater, meta-universe that has the capacity to create entire infinite spaces and what we know as causality, chances are we couldn't comprehend what exists there, as it would each a point that no longer works with out understanding of causality... So I'd say that is "unknowable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I understand. I was simply pointing out common philosophy of deities i.e. all powerful.

 

I will admit that I am religious in most respects, so I may be "biased" in that regard. I myself cannot conceive of a universe originating from nothing. It seems only logical to say that our consciousness came from a previous consciousness.

 

But it appears I am ranting, Does the infinite even exist in a physical reality? They say there are an infinite number of universes(and attributes thereof), so by supposition- the infinite does exist in a physical realm- The Omniverse. Does it not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I myself cannot conceive of a universe originating from nothing. It seems only logical to say that our consciousness came from a previous consciousness.

There is no logic involved in that proposition whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm really? Then answer the question. Where did the universe come from?

 

Matter? Did it just suddenly decide to exist?

 

Let's see your use of logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm really? Then answer the question. Where did the universe come from?

Matter? Did it just suddenly decide to exist?

Let's see your use of logic.

No, for two reasons:

 

Firstly "our consciousness came from a previous consciousness" is your proposal, you said it was logical, so you demonstrate it.

 

Secondly, stating that "our consciousness came from a previous consciousness" is not a statement founded in logic has nothing whatsoever to do with being able to answer the questions you just added into the mix.

 

It looks as if you are about to splatter logical fallacy pie and specious reasoning cake all over these lovely clean forums. I suggest leaving them on the plate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I myself cannot conceive of a universe originating from nothing. It seems only logical to say that our consciousness came from a previous consciousness.

The mistake you make is you start with "I myself cannot" which is a fair personal sentiment but then apply it as "objective logic" to "seems only logical" when really that is also "seems only logical to me" and thus a personal sentiment.

 

Many people share your view, and many people don't. Personally I don't have a problem with the universe originating from what I understand as nothing because even if you have a prior cause it doesn't solve the issue of first cause, which boils down to the highly contentious question of "start of time" where you measure a start within time to begin with reducing the question to a meaningless statement.

 

All that means to me, is everything we know as casual reality (in which cause and effect exist over time in space) cannot have an origin that can be explained in causal reality. To me, this gives me the impression the answer to that question is unknowable from our vantage point from withincausal reality.

 

To postulate that there may be a being that exists outside that is fine - perhaps even one that can create entire universes as we know them. Is that the most logical conclusion though? I'd say there must be some laws we don't understand and may not be able to understand that resulted in the universe, but whether those manifest as some sort of sentient being seems overly complicated considering the amazing things natural laws are capable of.

 

But that's just me - I offer that as an alternative, as you stated you had trouble seeing other logical solutions than the "deity factor" to the issue.

 

 

But it appears I am ranting, Does the infinite even exist in a physical reality? They say there are an infinite number of universes(and attributes thereof), so by supposition- the infinite does exist in a physical realm- The Omniverse. Does it not?

 

I believe it is considered possible and even the curvature of space is being measured to increasing degrees of accuracy to determine if it's concave-finite, convex-finite, or infinite plane. The results may be in but I don't recall seeing them.

 

I personally have a hard time believing in infinite planes or anything infinite in a universe that (if we are going from the big bang) started with finite energy - but I am no expert so someone with a better handle on astrophysics would have a much better answer.

 

Regarding "infinite universes" I think that applies to quantum probability and the idea that for each quantum superstate both possible collapsed states exist but in different probabilities in the universe. This would be "effectively infinite" in terms of anything we could comprehend, but there is a finite amount of matter and energy and thus a finite number of superstates and thus, ultimately, I would think a finite number of probabilities - so I don't think you'll find infinity there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can God microwave a burrito so hot that he himself cannot eat it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I will admit that I am religious in most respects, so I may be "biased" in that regard. I myself cannot conceive of a universe originating from nothing. It seems only logical to say that our consciousness came from a previous consciousness.

 

You've reminded me of this video with that comment:

 

The thing that made the things for which there is no known maker

 

 

IVbnciQYMiM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems only logical to say that our consciousness came from a previous consciousness.

 

This seems to crop up way too much. In extension to iNow's video, I have a standard reply:

 

Alright, then, so where did this first consciousness come from, eh?

 

To which there are a few standard answers:

 

1. It always existed

or

2. It spontaneously came into being

or

3. It was created

 

1 and 2 are especially ironic because they contradict the very premise that the conclusion was based on: that consciousness cannot have always existed or spontaneously come into being.

 

3 just leads to an infinite regress. 'Turtles all the way down' is oddly resonant of the original topic of this thread; it's not a conceivable proposition and therefore has no bearing on logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can God microwave a burrito so hot that he himself cannot eat it?

 

Of course. He did this 13 Billion years ago. Verdict not in yet as to whether He can eat it anyway.

 

(He seems to be waiting for it to cool. I suspect that is cheating, but who am I to question Him)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great vid, iNow

 

It looks as if you are about to splatter logical fallacy pie and specious reasoning cake all over these lovely clean forums. I suggest leaving them on the plate.

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where did the universe come from?

Incorrect.

 

:eyebrow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm really? Then answer the question. Where did the universe come from?

 

Matter? Did it just suddenly decide to exist?

 

Let's see your use of logic.

 

what creationists and scientists always seem to forget is that science and logical thought do not require us to know the answer to everything to remain valid.

 

"I don't know" is a perfectly respectible answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can a super intelligent being who created the universe and all of its laws "count" to infinity? An entity who is by common thought, an infinitely powerful being.

 

Think about it... Can the infinite-conscious be aware of itself to it's fullest extent?

 

If you posit something that is beyond our imagination and logic, then you cannot use those to place boundaries on this being. It can do anything means it can do anything, including the impossible, illogical, etc.

 

I myself cannot conceive of a universe originating from nothing. It seems only logical to say that our consciousness came from a previous consciousness.

 

I find it hard to conceive of nothing. My consciousness has evolved through time, just as my physical body has changed. If my body, especially my brain experiences damage, my consciousness is affected. When I die, there will be no evidence that my consciousness survived. It seems only logical that it be attributed to a physical brain than from an external source.

 

 

Hmm really? Then answer the question. Where did the universe come from?

 

Several ideas, but no one knows. I assume that something has always existed, that a state of nothing never exists. You can assume a being always existed and created something, we may never know the true answer. But, I hope you understand that the only difference between my assumption and yours is that your something(being) is a far greater assumption than mine. The more attributes you give to this being(without any evidence), the more unlikely that your assumption will be correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Christian, I believe he can do anything he wants.

As an engineering major, I prefer to not pay attention to all his glaring logical fallacies.

 

I actually kind of think it arrogant to assume our minds can understand infinite values and such, stuff like ABSOLUTE nothingness relative to reality. Our minds arent built to think in such terms.

We may eventually understand these concepts, but to just point them out to tear down others' faith is wrong.

I know this isn't what you were doing, but some do do that.

 

Thats my opinion.

Edited by Lan(r)12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We may eventually understand these concepts, but to just point them out to tear down others' faith is wrong.

I know this isn't what you were doing, but some do do that.

I suspect that you would feel otherwise if the poster were here suggesting that gravity is caused by tiny centaurs fornicating on the backs of turtles, or that unicorn farts cause erections in leprechauns.

 

Why the double-standards when religion and belief in Apollo Zeus Baal Thor Xenu Allah god enters the equation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect that you would feel otherwise if the poster were here suggesting that gravity is caused by tiny centaurs fornicating on the backs of turtles, or that unicorn farts cause erections in leprechauns.

 

Why the double-standards when religion and belief in Apollo Zeus Baal Thor Xenu Allah god enters the equation?

 

What double standards? I respect all religions...I would have answered the same if the OP had said "Can Allah concieve infinity" or whatever.

 

I just think that people shouldnt look down on others becuase they have a religion. You wouldnt believe hom many times people have looked at me, surprised that I had faith in the intangible and unscientific.

 

Faraday was a very religous man, and one of the greatest experimental scientists, IMO.

 

It seems to me that you are doing that...maybe Im misunderstanding you again INow, but you seem to very combative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just Ignore the Bigotry dude, some will bend over backwards and break their necks just to post something derogatory and demeaning about our faith.

 

they`re quite sad individuals filled with Hate, and are more to Pitied than anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, everybody needs to chill out immediately. iNow, YT, stay on topic, and don't make me send you to opposite sides of the playground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have inow on Ignore, I was responding to lan, not him.

don`t make More out of this than there is, Pleeeze!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a Christian, I believe he can do anything he wants.

As an engineering major, I prefer to not pay attention to all his glaring logical fallacies.

This is a bit troubling, because another way of reading it is "I shy away from dealing with issues which contradict my faith". If that is what you meant to say (whether or not you wanted to say it) then I would respectfully suggest that this approach is going to cause you significant grief throughout your life. There is nothing wrong with discarding some of your beliefs in favour of more rational or logically explainable phenomena when those beliefs have just basically been adopted because of "something someone said". It doesn't mean you have to abandon your god/s too.

 

I actually kind of think it arrogant to assume our minds can understand infinite values and such, stuff like ABSOLUTE nothingness relative to reality. Our minds arent built to think in such terms.

I see this a lot, this "our minds aren't built to think in such terms" thing, and I'd like just once for someone to explain why. Especially in the face of the evidence; that being that we clearly can and do think in those terms. Granted we don't do it on a daily basis while cooking dinner or deciding what to wear, but that's a different argument. If you want to understand an infinite value, then you study maths to the requisite level. Shazzam.


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged
well if the shoe fits...

...buy one in every colour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.