The Instigator
TotoTheToro
Pro (for)
The Contender
UseYOURname
Con (against)

The Universe is Finite

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
TotoTheToro has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/14/2018 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 491 times Debate No: 115538
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (0)

 

TotoTheToro

Pro

I believe in the absence of an Absolute in our reality; which would make our universe finite.

Though we consider the vast darkness that borders our planet to be somewhat of an enigma, one things is for sure given the technology currently available, the universe (as we know it) is finite. Since its birth, it is theorized that the universe has been in permanent expansion, with galaxies traveling hundreds of thousands of miles per second away from the center of what once was a singularity. Are we to assume that the universe existed before the expansion? Infinitely? Nothing that expands is truly infinite; an example, a cube of ice on the sidewalk on a hot summer day. Before it was put on the sidewalk, the cube was solid ice (singularity), when heat was introduced, the ice started to melt. Is the water surrounding the ice as it melts, infinite? Obviously not, it is slowly expanding until the cube completely melts. Eventually, after being spread out under the sun for so long, the water itself will vaporize , and follow the cycle of water we know and love ever since it was introduced to us in middle school. I think the same will happen to the universe. We still live in a young universe, but, somewhere down the line, energy will cease to exist, and the cycle will begin all over again. The process itself might be infinite, it might be a loop, but, the universe we live in, is finite.
UseYOURname

Con

While I agree that universe itself on a special level is finite I think you"re missing a key point here. Time, time is infinite it never stops and it never changes speed. Time is an endless infinity that constantly expands, time is the infinite and a definite subset of our universe, so if the universe is lorded over by time, an infinite property. Then the universe itself is inherently infinite.
Debate Round No. 1
TotoTheToro

Pro

Thank you for your response, very insightful!

Before I begin, may I suggest this article :
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu...
It's a good read on this matter if you have time to waste.

You are under the assumption that the universe itself is an entity, ruled by time ("the universe is lorded over by time"), however, before the universe came to being, there was nothing, not even time. Time came about with the expansion of the universe, as the universe is merely the space (or environment) where matter exists and decays. Understand that "time" as we know it, is an illusion; it is a man made construct to "measure" or more precisely predict the decay of energy/particles.
https://www.space.com...
The link above deals more with the illusion of time than space and the universe being finite, but it's a good read on our perception of time and dimensional space.

You also contradicted yourself when you said "time is the infinite and a definite subset of our universe, so if the universe is lorded over by time", how can the universe be lorded over by time, if time is a subset of the universe? I do think you tried to make it sound scientific without any knowledge or background in Set Theory or Discrete Mathematics/Relational Algebra (all deal with sets, subsets, and relationships). Though I do like the way you presented your ideas, they simply do not fit.

You try to make your argument sound philosophically correct by induction, when no supporting evidence (or base evidence for that matter) of the relationship between time and the universe was given. Through your argument, if I had to make a counter argument parallel to your approach, I would use induction to simply say that all matter is ruled over by time, and since time is "infinite", then all matter is inherently immortal (forever lasting, infinite). This is obviously a flawed argument. Why should the universe inherit any properties from anything? The universe is expanding, into what? We don't know, and it's hard to theorize on something that we have little knowledge on, but the universe is expanding, moving, this is a fact. Nothing that expands is infinite.

I look forward to reading your response.
UseYOURname

Con

You claimed that everything is finite. I"m sure your familiar with the four dimensions, all four are subsets of our universe. You say time is a measurement of the decay of particles but I don"t necessarily find that to be true. I define time as the infinite progressive sequence of events. I say the universe is lorded over by time in the sense that it is the most important dimension. You say that there was no time before the universe existed. I also find this to be untrue, I think time is always progressing and it doesn"t need to rely on the existence of other dimensions in order to foster itself. Thanks for the response though, I can tell you are very knowledgeable and clearly have thought about this a while. I think this debate is founded on a series of questions that aren"t answered at the moment, so finding any rational conclusion proves to be near impossible. This is just my pure speculation on the topic.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by TotoTheToro 3 years ago
TotoTheToro
Yes, I think we would border-line Particle Physics, if we start talking about matter and anti-matter. I also never said that dimensions are "purely mathematical", I said they were mathematical, but I failed to mention to what degree as I personally don't know, which is why I didn't go any further. Also keep in mind that though this is a Physics heavy topic, there's a fair amount of philosophical thinking, don't feel bad if you repeat yourself or if your ideas are wild. No need to apologize. You did go into several tangents that simply do not relate to the topic being discussed, but they are interesting nonetheless.

I have several issues with this statement: "But these perceptions can be defined, they have rules and we have tried very hard to not male them arbitrary. With this in mind. I would say dimentions do in fact exist in a very real, measurable way. Not as worlds beyond our own. But as a structure that our universe behaves in tandem with."

One, what rules and how are they arbitrary? I'm trying to think of what you speak of, but I'm simply confused. Is there research on this matter? A law I don't know about? A theory I haven't heard of?
Two, how are dimensions measurable? I've never heard of someone measuring a dimension in any way, especially in a "very real" way, certainly not as structures (you'd need a duplicate of the dimension to measure the dimension :P).
Three, let's say that you somehow managed to back all this up with cold hard facts, and research, and articles, one question still remains the same that you have not been able to answer with these wild claims on dimensions, is the universe finite? (Bringing it back to the topic at hand)

These are just fun readings, seeing you like the topic, whenever you have time to waste :D (some not relates, some are)
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...

P.S: d i m e n S i o n
Posted by Redbluegreen 3 years ago
Redbluegreen
So, if i understand you correctly. You are saying that, as dimentions are purely mathmatical, they do not have any bearing over how reality is structured. We invented the concept as a way to conceptualize the behavior of space time. If so, then this is problematic in my view. This would mean that purely mathmatical concepts have no relationship with the real world and even if reality behaves exactly as our mathmatical models suggest, this would be in a way purely coincidental. Dimentions are a matter of how we percieve reality to function to be sure, i do not disagree with that fact. But to discredit dimetions as borderline hypothetical is perhaps reductionistic. If this is the case then dark energy, the theoretical energy that causes our universe to expand at an accelerating rate is 100% mathmatical as we cannot define it in terms that deal with reality as we know it. It does not interact with matter as other types of energy does nor can we detect it. Does this mean its merely a perception that something is causing our universe to expand? I would say yes. But these perceptions can be defined, they have rules and we have tried very hard to not male them arbitrary. With this in mind. I would say dimentions do in fact exist in a very real, measurable way. Not as worlds beyond our own. But as a structure that our universe behaves in tandem with. I understand that to say that if dimentions are infinite then concluding the universe is infinite is illogical. What i am saying is that we either have to say dimentions existing at the same time as space time while also being intimately related is pure coincidence. Or that dimentions are an accessory property of the universe or vice versa. I realize i may have misconstrued your argument and may just be repeating myself to no avail. If this is the case. I once again apologize
Posted by TotoTheToro 3 years ago
TotoTheToro
That's Ok haha. Alright, I see what you are trying to say. Well, for one, I wouldn't consider time to be a dimension, and I think you've been conceptualizing dimensions the wrong way, for a few reasons. For one, dimensions are something we as humans came up with to map/coordinate or otherwise trace things in space (space here meaning any arbitrary block where matter exists; dimensions are mathematical). Theoretically, dimensions affect us more than they affect the space around us. They are perspectives, not physical worlds beyond our own. So yeah, dimensions are infinite, but why would the universe inherit that property if they're not even related? Einsteins Theory of Relativity and Newton's Law of Universal Gravity don't even mention dimensions, and they pretty much dictate how the universe (including celestial objects) works.
Secondly, (and lastly) you are claiming that the universe is infinite because dimensions are infinite, this is very similar to the argument made on the first round, when my opponent said the following "Time is an endless infinity that constantly expands, time is the infinite and a definite subset of our universe, so if the universe is lorded over by time, an infinite property. Then the universe itself is inherently infinite." this is called Inductive Reasoning and unless you have clear knowledge on how proofs work both in Mathematics and Physics, without providing real evidence you can't make such claims, because you are not theorizing or using analogies, you are using induction. It's like saying, that a four legged creature is a horse, thus all four legged creatures are horses. It doesn't make sense.
Posted by Redbluegreen 3 years ago
Redbluegreen
Sorry. Didnt mean to post it twice
Posted by Redbluegreen 3 years ago
Redbluegreen
Apologies. Again, i am not an expert on this subject so forgive me if im not explaining myself clearly. What i mean by dimention is that our space time exists in a number of spacial dimentions and, as far as i understand it, one time dimention. For example. Matter and energy move through 3 dimentional space in pur everyday lives. This is what we are capable of percieving as primarily 3 dimentional creatures. There are however more dimensions such as the 4th spacial dimention which im defining as a space containing 4 orthoganal axis. All of space time exists in these dimentions and behaves within the bounds of these dimentions. Dimentions are defined as infinite and if you say there was indeed nothing before the big bang then dimentions existed after space time propogated into existence. This means the universe, defined as space time and all of its contents, includes dimentions which are infinite which to me defines the universe as having infinite properties. But as i said before. Im no expert so please tell me where im wrong
Posted by Redbluegreen 3 years ago
Redbluegreen
Apologies. Again, i am not an expert on this subject so forgive me if im not explaining myself clearly. What i mean by dimention is that our space time exists in a number of spacial dimentions and, as far as i understand it, one time dimention. For example. Matter and energy move through 3 dimentional space in pur everyday lives. This is what we are capable of percieving as primarily 3 dimentional creatures. There are however more dimensions such as the 4th spacial dimention which im defining as a space containing 4 orthoganal axis. All of space time exists in these dimentions and behaves within the bounds of these dimentions. Dimentions are defined as infinite and if you say there was indeed nothing before the big bang then dimentions existed after space time propogated into existence. This means the universe, defined as space time and all of its contents, includes dimentions which are infinite which to me defines the universe as having infinite properties. But as i said before. Im no expert so please tell me where im wrong
Posted by TotoTheToro 3 years ago
TotoTheToro
I'm not sure what you mean by "all relevant dimensions spacetime exists in". Relevant? What do you mean by dimension? In my argument (assuming you are posting this comment after reading it) dimension has a different meaning. I meant, positional space, the way the Cartesian plane is dimensional; meaning you could select a point from an infinite number of possible points. If you could elaborate on your comment I would greatly appreciate it! I love the subject :)
Posted by Redbluegreen 3 years ago
Redbluegreen
I am not an expert on this subject. But the definitiom of a universe is all of space time and all its contents. This would include all relevent dimentions spacetime exist in correct? If so are dimentions not infinite to some degree mathmatically?
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.