Jesus as Lord - why is this appealing to so many?

[SteveII]

This "Completed Infinity" stuff is just nonsense. You have put two words together that are contradictory. Just like "married bachelor". Your phrase literally contains no meaning.

No, it's not.

The set of all integers is a clear example of complete infinity.

In the abstract!!!!!!!

In the philosophy of mathematics, the abstraction of actual infinity involves the acceptance (if the axiom of infinity is included) of infinite entities, such as the set of all natural numbers or an infinite sequence of rational numbers, as given, actual, completed objects. This is contrasted with potential infinity, in which a non-terminating process (such as "add 1 to the previous number") produces a sequence with no last element, and each individual result is finite and is achieved in a finite number of steps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_infinity

No one believes (at least none with any sense) that there is such things as an infinite number of anything concrete. ANY of you can end this by posting an article that shows I am wrong.

---

Steve, have you tried heading over to google for some independent research?  Or are you just going to stamp your feet and demand someone take screen shots of every page in their physics and mathematics books for you, and if they don’t, claim victory?  That’s not how this works, lol.

YES!! No one believes anything like Poly/Grand is proposing. I can't find something that isn't there!!

[GrandizerII]

No, it's not.

The set of all integers is a clear example of complete infinity.

In the abstract!!!!!!!

Yes, so? Can you provide an abstract example of a married bachelor as well? You were saying earlier that "completed infinity" is a logical contradiction like "married bachelor". I gave you a logical example of "complete infinity"

Steve, have you tried heading over to google for some independent research?  Or are you just going to stamp your feet and demand someone take screen shots of every page in their physics and mathematics books for you, and if they don’t, claim victory?  That’s not how this works, lol.

YES!! No one believes anything like Poly/Grand is proposing. I can't find something that isn't there!!

Like God, you mean?

[SteveII]

It's telling that no one can actually find and post a link or quote that shows an actual infinite of concrete objects (or events) is logical.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en...ysics&btnG=

You posted a search string. Which one should I click on AND what page should I go to? I want to see an actual argument--not read through textbooks looking to see if you are right. I'll wait.

[polymath257]

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en...ysics&btnG=

You posted a search string. Which one should I click on AND what page should I go to? I want to see an actual argument--not read through textbooks looking to see if you are right. I'll wait.

Pretty much every single link that comes up with that search uses infinite time as a way to understand some physical process.

What sort of argument do you want? People have gotten past worrying about potential versus actual infinities. That is a remnant of an old philosophy that is no longer used. It isn't discussed because it is irrelevant to the physics and math. Instead, we just use models with infinities in them and have no problems whatsoever.

Again, *if* the universe is infinite in extent spatially, *then* there are probably an infinite number of stars. At this point nobody knows if the universe is spatially infinite. But the very fact that we do not know shows that it isn't a *logical* problem: it is a question of what happens in reality. And that question is still open.

If it were like a 'married bachelor', then the issue would be settled, yes?

---

No, it's not.

The set of all integers is a clear example of complete infinity.

In the abstract!!!!!!!

So you admit it isn't a *logical* impossibility like 'married bachelor'? If it  possible in the abstract, then it isn't a self-contradictory thing.
Whether it happens in reality is another matter. That hasn't been resolved yet. But it isn't just a question of logical consistency. There are many logically consistent systems that are not real.

[GrandizerII]

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en...ysics&btnG=

You posted a search string. Which one should I click on AND what page should I go to? I want to see an actual argument--not read through textbooks looking to see if you are right. I'll wait.

Pick one and read. Honestly, I don't think you'll be able to understand the bulk of it. I don't. Too much technical stuff in there.

[SteveII]

In the abstract!!!!!!!

Yes, so? Can you provide an abstract example of a married bachelor as well? You were saying earlier that "completed infinity" is a logical contradiction like "married bachelor". I gave you a logical example of "complete infinity"

So, when you said there was such a thing as completed infinity of events, you are talking about real objects. Your justification is that mathematics has a useful (on paper) abstract concept like considering all of the natural numbers--which cannot be counted--as one thing. You don't see the difference? 

Still waiting for a link from someone. 

YES!! No one believes anything like Poly/Grand is proposing. I can't find something that isn't there!!

Like God, you mean?

Excellent example!!!! I can give arguments AND evidence AND LINKS!!! How about backing up your hypothesis!!

[polymath257]

Yes, so? Can you provide an abstract example of a married bachelor as well? You were saying earlier that "completed infinity" is a logical contradiction like "married bachelor". I gave you a logical example of "complete infinity"

So, when you said there was such a thing as completed infinity of events, you are talking about real objects. Your justification is that mathematics has a useful (on paper) abstract concept like considering all of the natural numbers--which cannot be counted--as one thing. You don't see the difference? 

Still waiting for a link from someone. 

No, the point at issue was whether a completed infinity is contradictory, like being a married bachelor. The fact that the math shows there is no internal contradiction shows that it isn't a *logical* issue whether an actual infinity exists or not.

Yes, math considers the collection of all counting numbers as a single  That single thing has infinitely many elements. The fact that this does not lead to a contradiction is enough to show a 'completed infinity' is NOT the same as a 'married bachelor'.

And, once again, physics uses infinite time or space all the time to help in the description of the real world.

Again, we do not know if either space or time is *actually* infinite. It is possible they are. It is possible they are not. It isn't a question of *logic*, but one of evidence for which is actually the case. Currently, the best evidence points to a spatially infinite universe. Also, most quantum theories of gravity point to an infinite time into the past.

[GrandizerII]

Yes, so? Can you provide an abstract example of a married bachelor as well? You were saying earlier that "completed infinity" is a logical contradiction like "married bachelor". I gave you a logical example of "complete infinity"

So, when you said there was such a thing as completed infinity of events, you are talking about real objects. Your justification is that mathematics has a useful (on paper) abstract concept like considering all of the natural numbers--which cannot be counted--as one thing. You don't see the difference?

Not just natural numbers, but all integers. And all real numbers as well.

What do you mean by cannot be counted as one thing? I'm not asking you to count anything. It's there, already complete.

Provide a logical argument against actual infinity existing in reality, if you think there is a logical problem. Saying "married bachelor" is not good enough because we already showed you it's not the same thing.

Excellent example!!!! I can give arguments AND evidence AND LINKS!!! How about backing up your hypothesis!!

Arguments, yes. But very weak and unimpressive arguments.

Evidence, beyond arguments? Don't kid yourself. And if there is any, it would be the unremarkable kind that wouldn't make me go "Woah! You're right!" even secretly.

And links? Don't need them unless I'm asking you for evidence that I can't access through just your words alone.

Here, all we need to discuss is the logic of actual infinity, and we've shown it's logical. That's all we're saying.

[polymath257]

Excellent example!!!! I can give arguments AND evidence AND LINKS!!! How about backing up your hypothesis!!

Considering one of your arguments is the one we are currently demolishing, you seem to have a problem.

---

Steve and RR should have more faith in their God, lol. Why should God not be able to create actual infinities anyway. You guys already believe he can timelessly create things and do other miraculous stuff. What stops you from believing he can't do actual infinity?

If Steve and RR put as much time and intellectually energy into a physics and math education as they do into theology and Christian apologetics, well...then they probably wouldn’t be theists anymore.  😋

Or logic.

[GrandizerII]

If Steve and RR put as much time and intellectually energy into a physics and math education as they do into theology and Christian apologetics, well...then they probably wouldn’t be theists anymore.  😋

Or logic.

Or human psychology.