What most people would call splitting hairs, I call finding seams, weaknesses and assumptions that, for me at least, need explicated to my somewhat satisfaction. Mostly these things end up circularly and nothing gets resolved except my understanding of certain subtleties. Infinity equals zero, or something like it.

Nothing material [that I can think of] is infinite. Numbers are infinite but aren’t material, and the universe might appear infinite, but isn’t, since it is bounded by whatever it is expanding into. Void exists outside the universe and is zero. Infinity and zero are both abstractions and have no material example. They can be described and understood but not seen.

You cannot show me zero whoopee cushions because if I see a whoopee cushion there are more than zero whoopee cushions.

Likewise, you cannot show me infinite rubber chickens because it would take an infinitely long time to do so. Time, a form of measurement, is concerned with finding the limits of things and, I think, would be quite useless in trying to measure something limitless. Also, as far as I know, time is not infinite. Perhaps using relativity you could show me infinite rubber chickens, but I’d much rather have a ham sandwich.

Back to the void. If void is zero [lack, a null set, emptiness] and void [that which is outside the universe] is infinite [boundless, immeasureable, illimitable] then they are equal in some sense. Both are abstractions of measuring the immeasureable.

Assuming that parallel universes exist, what I’ve been twirling around here must be taken to a higher order. If parallel universes exist then the void that one universe expands in to is less than meaningless. The determination then lies in discovering whether parallel universes are bound by something or otherwise exist independently is something I’ll need to meditate upon further.

It is important for me to hold on to the ~~realization~~ engagement I have finally reached in my understanding of the concepts of zero and infinity. While it is easy to reach the conclusion that they are equal while examining them with the expanding universe theory, the parallel universes paradigm adds a bit more complexity than I can grapple with at the moment.

I’m right, right?

### Like this:

Like Loading...

NO!

I completely agree. I think the concept of infinity and zero are akin to the note A sharp and B flat- the same thing but coming from different directions. I have been thinking about this quite a bit, and from the limits of my stunted mathematical knowledge, have found that this view sheds new light onto many mathematical paradoxes.

Infinity and zero can not be represented abstractly or reasoning will fail.

Why? Simple, if infinity squared is equal to infinity then infinity is either equal to one or zero.

But because infinity plus infinity is equal to infinity then algebraically and logically infinity must equal zero.

Though as Harvey quite rightly said these two are inverse and yet are equal. They can not exist abstractly or physically.

So if someone asks you a question with the answer infinity then say ‘I don’t know and I’m not dumb because you don’t know either’ or say infinity and say afterwards ‘infinity is equal to however many things it is not equal to’.

Thanks for your thoughts, sig and Kengo! That musical analogy works pretty well.

I have actually came to the same conclusion, (as a joke though), it’s an interesting thought.

Infinity is one divided into infinity. Anything infinite is part of one.

Space and time are not realities in the phenomenal world, but the modes under which we perceive things apart. They are not infinitely large nor infinitely divisible, but are essentially limited by the contents of our perception. Any content of perception is all part of one universal encompassment of space and time.

Glad I’m not the only one who considered this a reasonable propsition. Have any smart mathematicians played around with this idea in a rigorous way?

Sorry – propOsition

hate bad spelling

What makes you think that there is a void outside the universe? When was it created? It is generally accepted that space was created along with what was to become the lumpy and the shiny bits in the big bang and now it appears to have properties. It appears to be expanding and have the energy to do so, so it definitely exists but this void you write of when was that made? And what are its properties? I think, and I am not alone in this, that you cannot go outside of our expanding universe into your void in a space ship and watch it expand. We are expanding into nothing and nothing does not have an existence. That does make the frontier of our Universe a hard place to visualize, maybe it is something like an Escher drawing, and that is why I think you have invented a void. The point that you pondered regarding the parallel universes being bound cannot be possible they exist unto them selves and not in a place in your invented void. It they were bound in a common void then there would be a common time and that would mean that the multiverse would have had a beginning which it obviously cannot. What came before it? If the multiverse exists in nothing then in a sense it always was because it never began in time. Universes pop up and disappear utterly independently and in no order (time frame). The multiverse is truly infinite and that is why we are here as sentinel beings in the right kind of universe with odds that would otherwise be impossible in anything but an infinite multiverse

sorry to dissapoint

but your logic has a flaw…

universe isn’t infinite, its expanding

void is abstract, null

how is the universe expanding with no room?

like trying to over fill a baloon in a box, the ballon has a limit, unless there is room ouside that box, defining the void

also if you think about it

log base infinity of x, is equal to 0

therefore infinity to the zero power is equal to any number

so they are not abstract, they are nothing(null) and everything(infinite, literal not mathematical)

so any number can be proven. infinity and zero have an intimate connect with the number line(or circle if you beleive the -infinity=infinity postulate)

well then they can be defined, if minorly convoluted,

and if not, well your logic still shows flaws

but nice try, you were close too, but you slipped, I’d tweak your theorm. When you included the universe into the equation, you got undefined, sorry

don’t try to fill a balloon with no space

and don’t try to say a void seperates parralel universes, because then they have a distance, if too big or small to calculate.

@Sig: You’re assuming Adam is comparing infinity to zero as found on the number line in modern mathematics. Although I don’t have the time to properly rebute your arguement (writing a thesis at the moment), it would be worth one’s time to read the following chapter from “Everything Forever” by Gevin Giorbran.

http://everythingforever.com/st_math.htm

http://everythingforever.com/st_math2.htm

You should quickly realize the author isn’t applying modern mathematics to his arguement but rather observing “

Symmetrical Mathematics” which provides more logic to his conclusion. Hope this may also provide resolution to AW’s comment as well.I’ve got to say, I never expected what was, on my part, some aimless intellectual noodling while wasting time at my old job to garner so many excellent comments over the last 4 years.

I have also found that zero equals infinity, even though it sounds like I’m crazy to people that do not understand my thinking. For example, the more sides a shape has, the more it looks like a circle. So if a shape had infinite sides, it would look exactly like a circle. But a circle has no sides, and it has infinite sides, so zero would need to equal infinity. But then again (depending on how you define “side”) a circle could be seen as having one side, and my theory would be all wrong.

Or, if you think of the numbers on a number line, you could reason that half of infinity is zero, because half of all numbers are less than zero and half of them are greater than. So, if zero was half of infinity, zero multiplied by two would equal infinity, but it equals zero, so perhaps zero equals infinity?

P. Carr and Brian made really good arguments.

Brian’s argument defeated the original posters idea of a void existing outside the universe.

And P. Carr made a point that space and time are simply our human way of perceiving the world.

My question is: Can a moment of our existence be infinitely divided? and if so does that make death one moment limited by our existence?

In other words, does our nonexistence end where our existence begins?

my email: isalvadorr@gmail.com

I believe that infinity and zero are one in the same. Everything and nothing are the same concept. There is no way for nothing to exist without something. That something would be in turn, be everything. If one considers everything that can possibly be conceived (or not conceived) the possibilities are endless and cannot be divided into different “things”. Since there is no “things” anymore, nothing is achieved (no-things = nothing).

The way I see this, is that the all possibilities happening in all the possible universes during all possible “time” are coexisting simultaneously at one instance everywhere and nowhere at once. Our perception of an individual moment is the puzzling part.

An electron has a probability of being in a certain place at a certain time. It is everywhere and no where at the same time. I think our Universe is a very similar object as these virtually massless particles that make it up.

wow. i’ve maintained this theory for years now, it’s nice to see that i’m not the only one who assumes this to be true. the interesting part about this argument, is how it can be applied mathematically in the quantitative sense, and also philosophically in the qualitative sense. as mr. perry before me pointed out, nothing = no-thing. i find that both taoist and zen teachings point to this as well, the concept of no-mind, and to lose the ego is to be one with the ultimate. but one thing that i’ve been struggling with, if you take this a step further…assuming the universe is infinite, and assuming that we are indeed all one as physics has shown us, then does infinity = 1? and therefore 0 = 1?

yea,but if any matter or anything that is here in the universe and is expanding at its own rate then u cud go beyond the “physical universe” into the void.If stars and dust from rocks can expand outward then u cud go as far out as u want,and the void,i wud think, has no properties it wud just be open space not filled up yet just like any other free space in the universe.

and i agree with the infinity=0 stuff,but still pondering

nothing = everything. thinking about infinity is just as mind-boggling as thinking about nullity. shit just wraps around itself and indeed 0 = ?. it’s like how the empty set is inside every set, even itself, and it is the same set.

@wikipedia:[By the principle of extensionality, two sets are equal if they have the same elements; therefore there can be only one set with no elements. Hence there is but one empty set, and we speak of “the empty set” rather than “an empty set.”]

this empty set is ? or {}. it is in every set because any set has it as a subset. it’s like how we can always have zero stuff on us. i have zero millions dollars in a bag here next to me.

@wikipedia:[By the definition of subset, the empty set is a subset of any set A, as every element x of ? belongs to A. If it is not true that every element of ? is in A, there must be at least one element of ? that is not present in A. Since there are no elements of ? at all, there is no element of ? that is not in A. Hence every element of ? is in A, and ? is a subset of A. Any statement that begins “for every element of ?” is not making any substantive claim; it is a vacuous truth. This is often paraphrased as “everything is true of the elements of the empty set.”]

to nothing, all applies, as with everything.

if you are going to talk about everything you should go on living forever and never ceasing to speak of it. or say nothing at all; both choices are equivalent but as we can’t talk forever the latter is the most appropriate.

yet, here we are, stubbornly trying to say something about everything 🙂

and this is also why you can say that ultimately nothing matters, and you would be right. it’s another way of saying that every single little thing matters just as much as anything.

I came to this same conclusion several years ago when it dawned on me that nothing physical can be either zero or infinite. That it cannot be zero is an obvious truth, but it seems to me that if you put limits on infinity by saying that there are infinite “Xs” then you have destroyed the true meaning of infinity. How can anything infinite be parsed?

After thinking about this concept another idea come to mind. If you take 1 and devide that by 1/2 you get 1/2. If you divide 1 by 1/4 you get 1/4. If the fractions were to keep going allthough you would never get to zero you would have an increacingly large denominator. But getting to zero would be something like tangents in triganometry it would “blow up” hence infinity being zero. You may find fallacies in my thinking but remember im in 8th grade.

If I can’t show you 0 whoopee cushions because once you see one, it’s not zero. Following that logic, I can’t show you 1 whoopee cushion either. Nor 2, 3, 4, and so on. All numbers are abstractions, but that doesn’t mean they are equal.

Zero=infinity in that it proves The Big Bang Theory: from nothing to eternity.

Zero = Waking/life. All senses available.

Infinity = Sleeping/death. senses cease to exist.

What people need to realize is that as human beings (rather “intelligent life”) we have the ability to weave in and out of space and time. Simply meaning, that the voice inside of our heads is the navigator of our bodies (the in between of zero and infinity or bridge between two realms), that determines whether our mental energy is being exerted in the material world (what you can sense or better yet “zero world”) or whether mental energy is used to explore whats already inside of our minds (collective conscience/dream world or better yet “infinity”). Because we have this unique ability above all other lifeforms, whatever we can imagine in our heads thats logical, can be brought into the realm of zero. We have freewill during “meditative thinking”, and will while we live. For example, James Camerons Avatar. The Natives of Pandora are this human-like species that have the ability to “feel” the energy of everything around them, living in peace and harmony. WE HUMAN BEINGS are potentially this species as long as we believe we can be. Also, same goes for anyone in any situation. If you want to do something you can do it, anything at all, it all is attainable. The earth has made us perfect in everyway.. we just have to believe it, and realize it. THE VOICE IN OUR HEADS IS CAPABLE OF BEING GODLY.

Having thought of this earlier today and bringing it up to my pre-cal teacher i thought i was first to come up with the thought of infinity equaling zero. This forum is definitely bursting my bubble! You guys probably think im a noob being barely a pre-cal student, but please dont underestimate my logic and comprehension of things. I was thinking of all the possibilities to prove this theorem. Some of the thoughts are mentioned in this forum. I was stumped on a thought though. Can someone explain to me when talking about domain having a line start at zero and continuing to infinity, how this would look if infinity and zero equaled each other?

If zero equals infinity,(which it does not) does that mean that infinity over infinity equals zero. No. But, infinity is the inverse of zero. They both share the same properties, except for over themselves. Zero over zero equals infinity, because you can take zero out of zero an infinite amount of times.

The difference between infinity and zero is zero so infinity. It is a paradox.

I somewhat agree but I think you are coming at it from the wrong approach. First of all, this is all theoretical, so nothing we argue can be set in stone until further proved. If you think about it, everything we measure is relative. Nothing has velocity unless compared to another point or object with a different velocity. The same concept of relativity applies to everything else as well. If we assume infinity exists, which we don’t know, it includes all matter and energy and whatnot. Infinity is all existence. If it is all existence, it becomes the standard, the means of comparison, the constant. The zero. If everything is moving at an infinite velocity, then as a means of comparison, everything is moving at zero velocity.

From a purely mathematical view there is a case for infinity = 0. If we agree that the amount of positive and negative numbers is infinite, that is, we can continue counting them forever and never run out of numbers to count, then surely this formula holds true:

n + (-n) = 0

Infinite positive numbers plus infinite negative numbers would be equal to zero in the same way that 1 + (-1) = 0. Infinity equals nothing.

one flaw in your argument is your wording of the universe.

The universe is not expanding into anything.

the void is no thing. nothing. The void is not infinite it is not anything to ascribe to it any property makes no sense. There is no space-time outside of the universe and in fact to say outside of the universe makes no sense. I’m all for your interest in 0 and ifinity. Keep thinking.

I’ve been pondering the same ideas. As we approach infinity, I believe there is a point of escalation, we can call it something like an event horizon, where the ever increasing infinity becomes the zero of another dimension, or universe, or time.

My theory is that infinity = 0*, with 0* not being the same as the original 0, but one of higher (or lower) level, or energy, or time, or dimension.

I also propose that anything approaching infinity will do so in increasing speed as I believe that time is a part of infinity and one affects the other. By moving towards infinity, speed increases and time becomes so slow that it eventually reaches this “event horizon” at which a whole new time, or universe, or whatever .. is created. It might even stand for the creation of time, life or space in and of itself.

There are several reasons why I believe infinity = 0* (with 0* being different from 0, or other zeros that can be created). Imagine a circle on a piece of paper. There is nothing inside this circle, but now you add a dot, and another, and another. If you were to add infinite number of dots, the whole circle will expand into one big dot itself. And while infinity here does not equal to the original zero- dot-circle – it does equal to a new starting point on a different level. Time becomes involved, because with infinity, you also race against time.

Anyhow, I do believe infinity and zero are key players in the reality of our universe. How large can something get? And then, how small can something get? Is there really no end on either spectrum? And what are the implications to infinity = a new zero?

As you already note, in real life, we don’t find anything that is infinite, or zero. We imagine endless amounts of stars, but there are not an infinite number of stars out there. Even speed seems to be limited by that of light. Has there ever been anything infinite? Small or big – how far can it go?

And what about zero? I can say I have zero $ in my account. Does this mean I have an infinite number of $s in my account? Of course not! But it may mean that you have an infinite number of other valuables that stand equal for that zero $ in your account.

This is amusing. Very amusing.

How about this… Infinity can be equal to Zero, but not the other way around. [huh?]

They both have similar qualities, and I do not know if they both exist. i’ve enjoyed reading the comments here. I will be here again to tell you what I really feel about your thoughts on this matter. I have a few writings on Zero and Infinity on this website http://akorede.konfirmed.com please feel free to drop your comments if need be.

YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.ALSO WHILE MEDITATION, I REALIZED THE SAME THING. I THINK , WE ARE ON RIGHT track. keep it up.