Can infinite and finite coexist?

No, this why the concept of God is flawed from the start.

In mathematics? Yes. And not only that—there’s more than one “size” of infinity in mathematics.

For example, “how many whole numbers are between 1 and 5” is a finite quantity. (4)

How many rational numbers between 1 and 5 is an infinite quantity.

How many real numbers between 1 and 5 is also infinite… but it’s a greater level of infinite than the rational numbers.

In physics, a black hole has infinite density but a finite mass.

Yes they can. Space is finite, yet if you travel along a straight line in space, your travel time would be infinite, because space is curved in a way that eventually you will arrive at the point you started at and then you go on and on and on and on and so on, until the end of eternity.

The words infinite and finite are simply ideas. We use finite to describe something that is measurable, something with an initial and terminating spot. Infinite can be derived by something finite by removing the initial and terminating point.

For example, I can say an employee has 0% efficiency. I can then assume that a job will be completed in an infinite number of hours if given to him.

Simple algebra could not be used if the idea of infinity did not exist.

@ragingloli, ah, but if space is finite then so is time—because they are one and the same.

Calculus is used in practically every branch of engineering, which deals with finite quantities. But calculus relies on the idea of infinity to work.

Such wildly theoretical questions always remind me of Horatio’s timeless quote in “Hamlet.”
“There are more things between heaven and hell than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

In other words… do we really think our human peabrains know everything?

They can and do coexist everywhere and in everything. You know the universe in a grain of sand idea. You have more time in your life than you know what to do with and yet it will seem to have passed in the blink of an eye.

So, the first law of physics, conservation of energy, (energy cannot be created nor destroyed) would be a finite eternity? Since it cannot be created nor destroyed, it means it’s eternal, (always was, always is, thus, always will be), but because it’s a set amount, it is finite, correct?

The examples you gave me are within the same system. As @Qingu examples explained, coexistence can be seen within the particular system. Math has it’s examples and physics has it’s own as well.

In this case, whatever is responsible for the universe(which is a set amount), has the potential of being both infinite and finite at the same time? Can it have the potential of being just infinite, or just finite? How would infinity be an option that is responsible for the universe when the universe is already in existence, thus, the universe would limit the infinity?

No, it is not a correct conclusion. These statements:

“If finite exists then something infinite can’t
If infinite exists then something finite can’t”

Are made without any rationalization or justification. You type them after:
“Finite is a set amount
Infinite is without a set amount”
as though they logically follow from these statements, but they do not. At all.

One quantity can be finite – have a set amount, while a completely separate, distinct, and unrelated quantity can be infinite.

This is like saying “Short and tall can’t co-exist, because ‘short’ means of little height, wihle ‘tall’ means of great height, therefore they cancel each other out.”. They are simply adjectives. They describe separate nouns.

No. This question is like the old one about which is stronger, an immovable object or an irresistable force. It’s a semantic paradox. There cannot be both… either there is an object which cannot be moved, or there is a force which nothing can resist… not BOTH! They are mutually exclusive definitions.

Now, you can have a finite number of portions of things comprising an infinity, such as the number of people on this planet, which could be a sub-set of the number of living beings in the universe, which itself ( the universe ) may be infinite. You can also speak of certain infinities as being larger than other infinities, but that’s another topic. : )

@wwwhnf, I’m not sure if the time period should count as infinite. Something may have always existed… but “always” is a finite quantity, because spacetime is finite.

Similarly, you can talk about the “whole” movie, even though it’s of a finite length (a couple of hours).

@Qingu,

What would be responsible for the universe then? If something is without limit then there is no available space for the finite universe, but, since we do have the finite universe, so then whatever was responsible for the finite universe must only be finite as well, yes?

The only infinity would be an infinite amount of finite’s.

I don’t think we know that the Universe is finite. The bit we can see is but there is an unknown extent of universe beyond that. Quantum physics has also led to the weird idea that everything that can possibly happen does happen and everytime there are several possibilities they all take place though we can always experience just the one result. According to this theory there are worlds where Hitler won the Second World War and another where dinosaurs still rule the earth. Each world is as real as this one. Can’t prove it is true and can’t prove it is false.

@flutherother, you’re going against the first law of physics then? If energy cannot be created nor destroyed, then, that is a set amount, finite.

I am trying to say that there can only be finites, otherwise, something infinite would not be able to make space for finite. The only conclusion is that there is an infinite amount of finite’s.

I never break the law wwwhnf. If a little universe can be created so can a big one and even an infinite one.

@flutherother,

If you’re not breaking the laws of physics, then we know that the universe is finite, as the law says. If you want to suggest that infinite made finite, then explain how that’s possible? If you can’t, then the only conclusion would be finite made finite, and on and on, which would mean there can be an infinite amounts of finites.

The law just says what can or can’t happen within this universe. Its jurisdiction doesn’t extend back to the original creation or Big Bang. That is inexplicable and anything is possible scientifically and mathematically. For me though it doesn’t feel right that the universe is infinite.

@flutherother,

I am not arguing with you that the universe is infinite. The physics law is stating that the universe is finite, because it’s a set amount. What I am asking you is, how can the birth of our universe be credited to something infinite? I am suggesting that something finite was responsible for our universe because something infinite would not be able to make space for something finite.

I don’t know any law that says the universe is finite. I am also not sure what your definitions of finite and infinite are.

@flutherother,

Please read the next few replies that @Qingu wrote. Finite is limitation(a set amount). If our universe cannot be created nor destroyed, which is the first law of physics, it can only change forms, then, how do you not see this being a set amount?

I’ll quote @Qingu, “Something may have always existed… but “always” is a finite quantity, because spacetime is finite.”

I’m going to hit the hay as it is late here and my mind is boggled. Nice talking with you though. Maybe catch up later. Cheers.

@flutherother,

Alright. Nice talking with you too.

@CaptainHarley – I really like the physics resolution of that problem:

An irresistible force is not only possible, we know where to find it in reality: The gravity of a black hole at the event horizon.
An immovable object is not possible, even the singularity in a black hole, with its infinite density will still be moved by the gravity of other things like stars.
Problem solved.

Not much comment on the finite universe or not, although I used to watch shows about the big bang that described the universe’s size starting at a point, and then growing unimaginably fast, which of course would mean finite. I can’t determine if that’s still the theory or not.

Note: I mean universe as in our part of the multiverse, which would still be finite if the universe is, just Really Big (say every branch makes a new branch for every Planck volume every Planck time for each type of possible particle)

@Qingu,

If you say that “always” is finite then wouldn’t infinite be finite as well? It’s never ending?

@davidgro, this is precisely what I’m asking and suggesting. If infinite can’t make space for finite, then only finite can be responsible for finite.

The only thing I would like to note, is that I’m trying to comprehend what infinite means when I, myself, am in a finite existence, thus, my perspectives are only finite. Therefore, it may be possible for infinite to make finite, even though it doesn’t make sense to our finite minds. I don’t see how we will ever know what the potential of infinite really means. as long as we are contemplating this from a finite perspective.

@davidgro

Whoa! You’re fast approaching the limits of my knowledge! : )

Are you speaking of a new probability branching off from every universe every time there is a decision point?

@wwwhnf, “always” doesn’t mean infinite, it means every point in time. Every point in time is, apparently, a finite quantity—just like every point in space.

I think you are confusing “infinite” with “boundless.” Consider the surface of the earth. It has a finite area—but it doesn’t have any boundaries, or edges. The north pole isn’t an edge; it’s just a point like any other on the surface.

You can think of spacetime the same way—as a surface, finite, but boundless. The Big Bang, like the north pole, is just a point on this surface.

Also, if the universe is a boundless containment of all of space and time, then by definition the universe has always existed. Nothing created, or could have created, the universe, since the act of “creation” is predicated on a time where something doesn’t exist, followed by a time when it does.

@Qingu,

So, then there is no room for anything else. All that exists is a finite eternity?

Isn’t the big bang an attempt into seeking origins? If the finite is eternal then why are they seeking origins?

@wwwhnf, that’s how the big bang is often talked about, especially in the non-scientific media. But in science, the big bang is more aptly described as “the earliest point of the universe,” (in the same way that the north pole is the “northernmost point of earth”) not the origin of the universe.

When it comes to quantum mechanics, it gets even weirder because nothing even exists in the first place. Everything just has certain probabilities of existing, and if those probabilities are high enough and interact in a certain way, what we experience as “matter” comes into what we might call “existence.” But do the probabilities exist? I don’t think so… and yet what we call “existence” emerges out of those probabilities, like zooming into a pattern on a vast fractal.

@Qingu “if space is finite then so is time—because they are one and the same.”
In a sense it is. We have a certain finite volume of space right now, and the universe is of a finite age. The universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate though, so at infinite time it will be of infinite size. This is part of the reason why Fred Hoyle’s Steady State theory is implausible.

Yes.

Philosophically, everything can co-exist. Everything consists of, well, everything: thus, both finite and infinite can, as well.

Though I understand the question, and its (sort of) request to approach it mathematically, I choose not to ignore, but rather, to add to and connect with the Philosophy of Mathematics. As in all things, there is a higher power, there are other dimensions and planes, other levels of thinking; everything, in our minds, can exist. Thus, this is a no-brainer, imvho.

Yes, just not at the same time.

Here is something for you to contemplate. It is true that energy can’t be created or destroyed, but entropy is constantly increasing, meaning that the quality of the energy decreases. Our neck of the Universe is winding down. Stars are decaying and eventually no new stars will be created. Even when matter comes together to form a black hole, there is a decrease in entropy. So that leaves open the question of how the Big Bang was possible.

The proof is in the pudding.

I think they already do. Several good responses above. You can keep walking/moving half the distance to a wall and you will never get there but you will always get closer by a small fraction. You could still reach the wall however just by walking to it.

@CaptainHarley Yeah, although decisions in this case don’t mean the kinds people make, but stuff like ‘Is there a virtual electron here or not?’ so every point in a universe would branch a lot at every point in time. (Come to think of it, it might be that every point would also branch for every real particle in the universe as well due to the uncertainty in position – But that’s still finite!)

You are using terms that our small intelegence understands and can conceive but there is so much more than we can even picture in our limited minds. This world is in a 3 dimensional existance where phyiscal is what we understand and know. Our science only measures and looks at that which is physical. Is there more to this Universe than jjust the physical? If so we cannot comprehend what you are asking because our minds cannot understand the concepts you present. Infinite = limitless How can we comprehend limitless where we all are totally limited and all around us is. Finite = having limits we can understand this precept because that is our life and it has many limits to it.

Conservation of energy can be violated. Quantum fluctuation Energy can be created for a short period of time. This would allow infinite to create finite. Quantum physics also states that there are no absolutes. That would make all laws including the law of conservation of energy to be an uncertainty. Furthermore, there are problems with epistemology. Our knowledge is limited, this makes our models (scientific method) or any other model, limited.

Atheists use this supposed paradox as a philosophical proof against God’s existence. This is the perspective from where my statement is coming from. The answer, if accepted, could change the way several religions understand God.

The infinite and the finite can coexist if all that is finite exists within that which is infinite.

Example: If the occupants of a spaceship see stars all around them, then they are in outer space. It matters not the size of the space they occupy which has been believed to be both finite and infinite at different times in history. The existence of the spaceship, the stars and the planets would not limit the size of an infinite space (whether that space is – or is greater- than our universe. Math not only supports the concept of the infinite and the finite, but my example also fits: Any finite number divided by infinity equals zero. Therefore, the size of the finite items within the infinite space do not limit the size of the infinite space.

The landmark religious implication to this statement for any religion believing in an infinite God is that the finite universe must exist within the infinite God.

We are ‘in the presence of God’ no matter where we go. It is, therefore, not that much of a stretch to think of this concept literally and in three dimensions. If God is everywhere and we are not, then we are in God… All is in God.

This may border on the heretical, from the Christian perspective, but it is biblically compatible, provides a means of understanding how God can be everywhere at the same time while being all-powerful. Plus, it ends the supposed paradox presented by the atheists that God cannot exist if only the finite exists.

When I thought of this, it answered all of the difficult questions I had about God.

One last statement: God’s knowledge is infinite. My knowledge is finite. The amount of knowledge I have does not subtract from the availability of knowledge for God to have. We can both know some of the same things, but God can know more.

Cody G. Carson