Actual Infinity in Reality?

[GrandizerII]

Like I keep saying, cause/effect relationships are only meaningful to talk about in a certain context (from a temporal perspective). When we're discussing the fundamental nature of reality, especially if we're assuming B-theory of time (and/or eternalism), you have to be willing to accept that it may be logically possible that causality is just an illusion. If there is no time flow, then there is not really change or motion happening. And no causality. Which possibly leaves us with simply an eternal 4D (or higher) static structure of which every time moment is a part of. I'm just saying.

Do you really believe that? It seems to me you are looking for a theory that gets you a past infinite rather than looking for theories that relate better to reality.

Unlike your favored theory of time, the B-theory of time is supported by modern science (Einsteinian relativity and all). So perhaps you should make an attempt to discard theories that don't better relate to reality and adhere to ones that do. So why aren't you doing that? Could it be because you need God to exist?

For example, you. Do you imagine that the thing that makes you you endures from moment to moment? How does human consciousness work with "causality being an illusion"

I am a perdurantist, meaning that I am the sum of all time instances of me (in this local universe, in case of a multiverse). This is a logical implication of eternalism.

Human consciousness perceives causality from our temporal perspective. It's not an illusion in the sense that it isn't perceived. Rather, it is an illusion in the sense that fundamentally, causality is not a feature of the underlying reality.

An you keep failing to understand that the point of Hilbert's Hotel (or the reformulated example) is to show that infinite set theory and how you can use them in theoretical mathematics does not translate into the world of real objects. Don't keep asserting that because mathematicians can do it paper--therefore reality. No one has shown how that is possible yet. You have failed to produce a single reference in this thread and the last that shows the mathematicians believe there can be an infinite amount of an actual thing.

I never said that mathematical possibility automatically translates to actual possibility. What I did do is challenge you to provide that logical/metaphysical/physical constraint that would prevent an actual infinity from existing in reality. You have yet to do so. So until you do, it is fair to say that an actual infinity in reality seems logically possible.

You can not get to an actual infinite by adding one thing after another. In the real world, that's what you have to do--add things one after another. You can't just jump to the end and declare that one actually exists because we can write it down on paper and talk about potential infinities in theory.

First of all, under the B-theory of time, there is no potential infinity, the only type of infinity is an actual infinity. If I were a vastly more superior entity than I actually am (almost godlike), and the universe was infinite in spacetime, there would be infinite time moments which cover every instance of me counting every positive integer ever. But because I am only human, I can only live for so long, and so I will not ever be able to count every single element in an infinite set of positive integers.

And second, one need not have to count things for things to start existing.

Don't give me equations with the word 'infinity' in them. That is not proof or even a good indication that one can exists. Give me examples of something or show where smart people talk about how they can exist and I will reconsider. Until then, all you are doing is asserting a claim with nothing to back it up.

The premise is that an actual infinity is an infinity (say, an infinite set of things) in which all its elements exist already. And using analogies like the Hilbert's Hotel, and the other one you used in this thread, we saw that such a premise would imply counter-intuitive outcomes, but not logical contradictions. If we assume actual infinity in reality, then we notice there is no logical contradiction that arises from doing so. Therefore, in the absence of counter logic/evidence, an actual infinity in reality is logically possible. This is a sufficiently conclusive argument in response to the objection that an actual infinity is not logically possible. Nothing more on my part needs to be argued.