Comments on: Dialog on “Is the Universe Infinite?” http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/ Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:11:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Kelly http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14636 Kelly Sat, 03 May 2008 18:47:43 +0000 http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14636 Quarks taste like pomegranates. Occasionally. Quarks taste like pomegranates. Occasionally.

]]> By: Steve H http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14602 Steve H Thu, 01 May 2008 15:11:36 +0000 http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14602 Vanderleun, I'm not sure anyone who's committed enough to become a 'cosmologist' is also part of the subset of 'sucks.' I suspect that Jeff's right and they are daunted by the scope of the thing; but we make bets on intangibles and unprovables every day. I've got a lot riding on Love and Hope, both quite abstract and hard to quantify; might as well bet on the size, shape and quark flavor of the universe if I'm going to gamble at all. It strikes me that we don't have the right tools yet, and that when Rudy says "I’m also groping for a good way to describe some in-space scenario that would make the “holes” evident," he may think he's planning a story but he's actually designing an experiment as well. The right way to look at a problem may be the solution, as in non-Euclidean space. You can't go there, but you can look into it and use it to solve problems. Vanderleun, I’m not sure anyone who’s committed enough to become a ‘cosmologist’ is also part of the subset of ’sucks.’ I suspect that Jeff’s right and they are daunted by the scope of the thing; but we make bets on intangibles and unprovables every day. I’ve got a lot riding on Love and Hope, both quite abstract and hard to quantify; might as well bet on the size, shape and quark flavor of the universe if I’m going to gamble at all.
It strikes me that we don’t have the right tools yet, and that when Rudy says “I’m also groping for a good way to describe some in-space scenario that would make the “holes” evident,” he may think he’s planning a story but he’s actually designing an experiment as well. The right way to look at a problem may be the solution, as in non-Euclidean space. You can’t go there, but you can look into it and use it to solve problems.

]]> By: Vanderleun http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14599 Vanderleun Thu, 01 May 2008 08:27:05 +0000 http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14599 "Anyhow, for that reason I think most cosmologists are agnostic on the question of a finite or infinite universe." That's also the reason that, at the event horizon, most cosmologists suck. They just aren't interesting enough to be interested in the really interesting question. Instead, they prefer to suck. “Anyhow, for that reason I think most cosmologists are agnostic on the question of a finite or infinite universe.”

That’s also the reason that, at the event horizon, most cosmologists suck. They just aren’t interesting enough to be interested in the really interesting question. Instead, they prefer to suck.

]]> By: rs http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14589 rs Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:36:53 +0000 http://www.rudyrucker.com/blog/2008/04/30/dialog-with-jeff-weeks-on-the-shape-of-space/#comment-14589 there are exactly alef-null - 1 stars! I'm sure I've said this before, but the question I keep puzzling over is could one use a finite set to determine that some other set is actually infinite? Sometimes I think I'm on the edge of showing that it is not possible. My thinking goes something like for every finite set there is a finite set which it can not distinguish from infinite because it covers the generative space of the set. For instance if my set is {0, ..., 9999} and I allow all polynomials of this size I can express a sizable but finite space, and I cannot tell this space from an infinite space using only the polynomials from this space. I think this follows from incompleteness, or maybe just from the diagonal argument, but I'm not committed enough to formalism to show it, or perhaps state it. In any case, even if there are not an infinite number of stars in our universe, surely there are an infinite number of universes in the multiverse. Each universe God's attempt to contemplate truth with a new twist on the axioms. there are exactly alef-null - 1 stars!

I’m sure I’ve said this before, but the question I keep puzzling over is could one use a finite set to determine that some other set is actually infinite? Sometimes I think I’m on the edge of showing that it is not possible. My thinking goes something like for every finite set there is a finite set which it can not distinguish from infinite because it covers the generative space of the set. For instance if my set is {0, …, 9999} and I allow all polynomials of this size I can express a sizable but finite space, and I cannot tell this space from an infinite space using only the polynomials from this space. I think this follows from incompleteness, or maybe just from the diagonal argument, but I’m not committed enough to formalism to show it, or perhaps state it.

In any case, even if there are not an infinite number of stars in our universe, surely there are an infinite number of universes in the multiverse. Each universe God’s attempt to contemplate truth with a new twist on the axioms.

]]>