Actual Infinity in Reality?

[polymath257]

You really can't mean that. Mathematics (and certainly NOT metaphysics) is the prototypical logical subject.

I clearly said "Mathematical axiomatically-driven abstractions" are not sources of logic. The noun in that phrase is abstractions not mathematics. 

Here is an argument:
1. It is possible that space is flat (in fact, the observed evidence suggests this).
2. Spatially flat manifolds can be infinite in extent. (R^4 is an appropriate example)
3. Hence it is possible that space is infinite in extent.
4. As far as we can see, space is homogeneous (the same at all locations and in all directions)
5. Hence, it is possible that there are an infinite number of stars.

Now, what is you 'metaphysical' issue with either mathematical 'abstractions' or physical possibilities?

That's a mess in addition to not being a valid argument. 5 does not have anything to do with the other 4. At most, 1-4 is trying to argue for infinite space. Stars came out of left field. 

I don't think 3 follows from 1 and 2. In other words, 1 and 2 could be true but that does not give any indication that 3 is true.

OK, let's take things slower.
2. it is possible for spatially flat manifolds to be infinite in extent.
2a. By 1, space is a spatially flat manifold.
3. So it is *possible* for space to be infinite in extent.

4a. Space has at least one star.
4b. Since it is possible for space to be homogeneous, stars are distributed evenly (on the large scale) throughout the universe.
4c. from 3, it is possible that space is infinite in extent.
4d. If space is infinite in extent and stars are distributed evenly in space (on the large scale), then the number of stars is infinite.
5. It is possible that thwe number of stars is infinite.

---

How many virtual photons are emitted and reabsorbed across the universe every Plank interval ??

I suppose it's just a large, very large number, but not infinite . . . .

I'm not sure that is a meaningful question, quantum mechanically.

---

You really can't mean that. Mathematics (and certainly NOT metaphysics) is the prototypical logical subject.

I clearly said "Mathematical axiomatically-driven abstractions" are not sources of logic. The noun in that phrase is abstractions not mathematics.

ALL of math is abstractions. Even the number 2 is an abstraction. But, for that matter, logic is an abstraction.