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

[SteveII]

Hilbert's Hotel:

Imagine a hotel with a finite number of rooms. All the rooms are full and a new guest walks in and wants a room. The desk clerk says no rooms are available.

Now imagine a hotel that has an infinite number of rooms. All the rooms are filled up so an infinite number of guests. A new guest walks up and wants a room. All the clerk has to to do is to move the guest in room #1 to room #2 and the guest from #2 to #3 and so on so your new guest can have a room #1. You can do this infinite number of times to a hotel that was already full.

Now imagine instead the clerk moves the guest from #1 to #2 and from #2 to #4 and from #3 to #6 (each being moved to a room number twice the original). All the odd number rooms become vacant. You can add an infinite number of new guests to a hotel that was full and end up with it half empty. 

How many people would be in the hotel if the guest in #1 checked out?

If everyone in odd number rooms checks out, how many checked out? How many are left?

Now what if all the guest above room number 3 check out. How many checked out? How many are left?

So from the above we get:
infinity + infinity = infinity
infinity + infinity = infinity/2
infinity - 1 = infinity
infinity / 2 = infinity
infinity - infinity = 3

Conclusion: the idea of an actual infinite is logically absurd.

infinity is not a number, lol.

The set of all positive integers is still the same size as the set of all even positive integers.

Also, what's 0/0? Or 6/0?

Is 0 logically absurd as well?

Leave Cantorian set mathematics to those who are qualified to work with it.

NOT SO FAST. You are not proposing Catorian set mathematics. You are proposing there are real infinities in the real word and Hilbert's hotel shows you what happens when you start talking about infinities in the real world--you get absurdities. 

---

Two things. First, he said that if the universe is finite in time and space, all of our calculations work.

He also said it's still a problem nevertheless.

Yes, a problem because the math/physics that are showing promise also don't indicate a past eternal universe--and so then begs for an explanation. He clearly does not say there is a problem with the math/physics that infinities would solve. The universe not being past eternal brings up metaphysical question he does not like--a problem for an atheist. 

Second, he said that our best hope for an explanation is an infinite (in time and space) universe. He did not say that is what the theory is. He has no idea what that is but he realizes the consequences that if the universe is not eternal, an explanation is required for it. In other places he has called the universe a brute fact. By definition, if you consider something a brute fact, you have no explanation.

I thought the argument we're trying to make here is that it is a logical possibility. What theory did you want exactly?

Admitting the universe is a brute fact is the same as admitting you have no explanation. An explanation would be that it is possible that an infinite series of causes is logically possible. In other words, if your explanation is that a series of infinite past causes is possible, you are NOT saying the universe is a brute fact--you have an answer!

The problem is no one is saying that. The smartest atheists admit the universe is a brute fact.

[Whateverist]

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.

Done knocking over pieces and shitting all over the board, so it is time to crow about your victory.

[polymath257]

Hilbert's Hotel:

Imagine a hotel with a finite number of rooms. All the rooms are full and a new guest walks in and wants a room. The desk clerk says no rooms are available.

Now imagine a hotel that has an infinite number of rooms. All the rooms are filled up so an infinite number of guests. A new guest walks up and wants a room. All the clerk has to to do is to move the guest in room #1 to room #2 and the guest from #2 to #3 and so on so your new guest can have a room #1. You can do this infinite number of times to a hotel that was already full.

Now imagine instead the clerk moves the guest from #1 to #2 and from #2 to #4 and from #3 to #6 (each being moved to a room number twice the original). All the odd number rooms become vacant. You can add an infinite number of new guests to a hotel that was full and end up with it half empty. 

How many people would be in the hotel if the guest in #1 checked out?

If everyone in odd number rooms checks out, how many checked out? How many are left?

Now what if all the guest above room number 3 check out. How many checked out? How many are left?

So from the above we get:
infinity + infinity = infinity
infinity + infinity = infinity/2
infinity - 1 = infinity
infinity / 2 = infinity
infinity - infinity = 3

Conclusion: the idea of an actual infinite is logically absurd.

The only one of these that is wrong is that last. Subtraction of infinities is not well defined. So yes, we have infinity+3=infinity, but that doesn't mean that infinity-infinity is well defined. In fact, since infinity+5=infinity also, that shows subtraction is NOT well defined.

None of the rest are actual contradictions, are they? They are merely differences between how finite things work and how infinite things work.

Even the fact that subtraction isn't well defined is just one of those differences between finite and infinite collections.

So? Where is the logical absurdity?

[GrandizerII]

infinity is not a number, lol.

The set of all positive integers is still the same size as the set of all even positive integers.

Also, what's 0/0? Or 6/0?

Is 0 logically absurd as well?

Leave Cantorian set mathematics to those who are qualified to work with it.

NOT SO FAST. You are not proposing Catorian set mathematics. You are proposing there are real infinities in the real word and Hilbert's hotel shows you what happens when you start talking about infinities in the real world--you get absurdities.

I reject your equations. Stop treating infinity like a number! Infinity is not an element of the set of natural numbers, nor an element of the set of integers, nor an element of the set of real numbers. It's NOT a number! So when you use operations on infinity, you should expect to see results that you wouldn't expect with numbers.

And keep in mind that even with finite numbers, you sometimes get an equation where x is equal to more than one value. That doesn't mean that x is a logical absurdity ...

Yes, a problem because the math/physics that are showing promise also don't indicate a past eternal universe--and so then begs for an explanation. He clearly does not say there is a problem with the math/physics that infinities would solve. The universe not being past eternal brings up metaphysical question he does not like--a problem for an atheist.

He's saying there are problems with all possibilities, and he is also NOT saying that an infinite universe in time and space is logically impossible. Pay attention.

Admitting the universe is a brute fact is the same as admitting you have no explanation. An explanation would be that it is possible that an infinite series of causes is logically possible. In other words, if your explanation is that a series of infinite past causes is possible, you are NOT saying the universe is a brute fact--you have an answer!

The problem is no one is saying that. The smartest atheists admit the universe is a brute fact.

Saying something is logically possible doesn't mean being confident of it as actual.

[polymath257]

I can add a few more.

infinity * infinity=infinity

infinity/5=infinity

infinity^infinity=infinity

5*infinity=infinity

Generally, division of infinity isn't defined. So, infinity/infinity isn't well defined. But if you divide an infinite set into a finite number of equal sized sets, each piece will be infinite.

[SteveII]

What I am objecting to is not the concept of infinity. I'm fine with that. What I am objecting to is NO ONE believes it applies to the real world, real objects, real series of events--because successive addition will never get you to it. A simple article would prove me wrong. 

Even if you think it should (like Sean Carroll), there is no theory how to defeat the logic. You must accept it without explanation (brute fact). But that is not what Grand/Poly are suggesting. They think they are smarter than Sean Carroll and think it a settled question with the answer -- of course it works--no problem.

You're NOT paying attention!

polymath is arguing similar to Sean Carroll, in that he's not sure if space/time is infinite or not, but the bet is that it is.

No, not the "bet". That implies a theory. There is no theory that gets past the illogical concept of an actual infinity. What you are describing is a hope (the word Sean Carroll used). And that hope is driven by one thing only: a desire to have no beginning that then requires an explanation other than naturalism. 

And I make no claim that what I hold to is scientific in its entirety. My personal view is logical but not necessarily completely supported by scientific evidence, though it also doesn't contradict it either. So it's absurd that you want us to post a scientific theory that says this is what is the case, when no one said anything about a scientific theory.

You have not shown that your personal view is logical. You don't have to post a scientific theory. You chose to post a video that brought that up. Post anything that shows that people believe an actual infinite number of real things is possible--from any reputable source.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yeah, that must be it.  Infinity is a giant naturalist conspiracy, that goes back thousands of years....even pagans were in on it!

[SteveII]

I can add a few more.

infinity * infinity=infinity

infinity/5=infinity

infinity^infinity=infinity

5*infinity=infinity

Generally, division of infinity isn't defined. So, infinity/infinity isn't well defined. But if you divide an infinite set into a finite number of equal sized sets, each piece will be infinite.

I'm done with you because you seem incapable of having a discussion. You cannot hold up your end of anything. It has been a hundred posts of assertions and never addressing anything mentioned--just writing vague sentences that only you think applies to anything. 

I think there is still hope for Grandizer.

[GrandizerII]

LOL!!!

[The Grand Nudger]

Jokes on you.  Grandizer is part of the infinity illuminati sleeper cell. His 401k is fully vested and everything. Due to the nature of his work, he'll be able to make infinite withdrawals from that account...

....as long as they only add up to $1 in total, ofc. We're a very efficient organization.