Tuesday, 30 October 2012

Stream/Zoom of Infinity

I must apologise for the stream of thought that is to follow. It is incoherent, but follow-able, just about

1, Nothing, by its own definition, doesn't exist . . .
2, How can something not be made of something?

One can't encompass all of infinity. Even if one could have infinite potential, as in grow/expand for an infinite amount of time/space, one would never attain/encompass all/infinity (as one starts from a fixed, nucleated position). For a person locked within your "infinity" they would never be able to realise that they were locked within your, not infinity, but: infinitely expanding zone, but they would perceive it to be a true infinity (unless they could expand at a faster rate and reach the frontier of your expansion). So from a POV a non-infinity can be regarded or concluded as an infinity. But does this mean that infinity doesn't exist? For one to expand infinitely there needs to be an infinite space to expand into, unless the space you expand into is also expanding just quickly enough for your expansion to not reach said boundary. However, if there were to be a limit, it would be reached and infinity as a concept could be shelved. I would suggest, that logically, one can't shelve infinity until it can be proven that existence is finite.

Not sure that I have said all I want to in that last paragraph, but maybe you could fill in any gaps?

I think one of the problems with our attempts to comprehend infinity is we tend to have this "mandelbrot-zoom-esque" vision of OUR own outward and unending journey, as we try to visualise. But I would say that the whole humanoid-pov system of thought is kind of counterintuitive to the true handling of infinity and its corollarised threads. One can't take on infinity, anymore than one can visualise many multiple-dimensional theories without trying to translate them back into 3/4D. Starting from the human/nuclear POV is not a position one can take, or allow to dictate comprehension, when tackling infinity, I feel.

Instead, I would say, one should try and accept the concept that infinity is actual, in all directions: Infinite time, Infinite space, Infinite supramacro 3D upscaling, Infinite inframicro downscaling. I don't personally see any other logical route, logically.

I said before, try to see all of infinity at once (as an attempt to visualise I suppose): "Infinity can only be seen if it is seen from everywhere at the same time. This is the “Infinitum Leap” that is needed to appraise its truth majesty." But seeing everything within infinity (as I describe it) from everywhere in infinity, does seem to be a concept too far. As a concept (seeing infinity as I suggest) one can kind of process it through the mind, think that one has a handle on its suggestion. But to try and visualise it is to try and drag it back down into the human 3/4D framework. A seeming impossibility.

Can one think of infinity without one’s being asserting its constant
zoom function?

Maybe the paradox isn’t wrapped up in infinity itself. Just wrapped up in our attempted comprehension of its physical system, and the conjectures it sustains? The paradox being our ability to comprehend the concept of infinity without being able to wholly visualise it. Or the paradox being our inability to see infinity as a whole despite the fact we all are, as individuals, even when separated, infinite in scope. Ok, if one’s perception zooms out then one’s physical self becomes a dotted mote of shrinkage and gone. But if one’s perception zooms in and down through scale, forever one’s perception would travel, just like a Mandelbrot zoom. I am aware that mathematics has infinities in different forms; different boundaries used as appellation and designation. But for me, the holy grail (being something I believe in despite its lack of evidence!) is maybe one day being able to grapple and fully comprehend . . .

. . . had to stop . . .

No comments:

Post a comment