Infinite Universe

[LJ57]

This is probably a stupid question but I'm curious to know what others think about it.

I was reading that astrophysicists have calculated a 95% certainty rate that the universe will continue expanding and not collapse. If this is true, wouldn't this basically mean we are living in an infinite universe? I've always read that in an infinite universe it's a mathematical fact that everything that can happen will happen. Would this be evidence for the existence of God, or at least the fact that God will eventually exist?

[Silvertusk]

The universe is not infinte. It is finite. It started from a singularity. Even if it keeps expanding it will never be infinite. What will happen in the future is uncertain. However God exists from the beginning so i am not sure where this arguement fits in.

Silvertusk

[Cobolev]

Even if it keeps expanding it will never be infinite. What will happen in the future is uncertain.
Silvertusk

Excuse me, I donn't know what the words mean exactly. In my opion, if the universe is keep expanding, there will be no end of it, right? How can it be said that it will never be infinite. I read some books about cosomology and the future of the universe seems to be almost nothingness because of accelerating expanding.

[bizzt]

Even if it keeps expanding it will never be infinite. What will happen in the future is uncertain.
Silvertusk

Excuse me, I donn't know what the words mean exactly. In my opion, if the universe is keep expanding, there will be no end of it, right? How can it be said that it will never be infinite. I read some books about cosomology and the future of the universe seems to be almost nothingness because of accelerating expanding.

Do you believe there was a Beginning?

[LJ57]

I probably should have clarified my original post with regards to the use of the term infinity. I certainly believe, as do most, that the universe had a beginning with the Big Bang. By infinite I mean the idea that the universe will likely continue expanding and never contract as was once believed. (Big Crunch) I'm no expert on cosmology and astrophysics but it seems like there are metaphysical implications if space and time are allowed to continue forever. Hope that makes some degree of sense.

[Swamper]

Well, whether the universe is infinite really depends on what you mean by "the universe":

1. If you're referring to all of the matter and energy in existence, then yes, it is finite but increasing in size.
2. If you're also referring to the empty space which all matter and energy is suspended in, then it is, as far as we know, never-ending.

So basically, finite material, infinite emptiness.

[Seraph]

The universe is not infinite even if it keeps expanding without being pulled back together. From what i know, cosmologists say that the universe will continue to expand, but will end either from heat death or even the "Big Rip".

[ageofknowledge]

If the universe did keep expanding forever, any biological life will certainly not be able to survive it.

[chukura]

This is probably a stupid question but I'm curious to know what others think about it.

I was reading that astrophysicists have calculated a 95% certainty rate that the universe will continue expanding and not collapse. If this is true, wouldn't this basically mean we are living in an infinite universe? I've always read that in an infinite universe it's a mathematical fact that everything that can happen will happen. Would this be evidence for the existence of God, or at least the fact that God will eventually exist?

In answering the first question, the asumption from the calculated "certainty" would indeed suggest that in our currrent model, the universe is indeed infinite. What i mean by "current model" is the plain of existence and conciousness that humans are aware of, outside of the will of God. That is, the universe is only infinite as we percieve it, because that's how God has made it for this space of time. God could very well decide to make the universe reach a critical density and collapse. its infinity depends on Him.

I've always read that in an infinite universe it's a mathematical fact that everything that can happen will happen

When talking about the infinite nature of the universe, I think that the assumption is that "everything that can happen could happen". There is a potential for everything. Quantum physics does a good job of explaining this. A simple example is the fact that an electron can exist in more places than one at the same time. Previously, scientists were only able to locate only one position of the electron at a given point in time (using a two slit diffraction experiment). Scientists are now able to manipulate the electron to a state where it is in up to 3000 locations in a closed space, at the same time (only up to about 3 positions visible at the same time!). Each of those locations is a possibility, or potential of where the electron could be at a point in time. The assumption is that the only reason why scientists were only able to see one position at a time, is that the electron was being observed. This follows the theory that matter only exists when you look at it.

A scientist named Schrodinger (not sure of spelling), conducted an experiment where he put at cat and a certain poison substance in a closed box for a certain time. He postulated that within the box, the cat is neither dead nor alive until the box is opened to see. There is an infinite amound of possibilities of the cat's condition, all of which are concentrated into only one at the time that the box is opened. Something only happens because it is observed. I believe that this is the evidence that God exists.

A large school of thought follows the model that the universe came to be as a result of the "big bang", or a rapid expansion from a single point called a singularity. In line with what was just discussed above, the only way that the big bang could have happened, is if some sentient, conscious being observed it. God. Is it then so absurd to postulate that if this sentient being exists in a plain upon which this universe was created, that this being is more intelligent than us the creation, and that as an observer it has a direct influence on the events of this universe? i belive that God is, and that what quantum and astro physics reveils about the nature and history of our universe is merely a validation that God exists. All of this is just man proving what God has already told us in His Word. That He is. He is omnicient, and He is omnipresent.

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Not to diminish your fine post. But I think it is important to note that the "observer" in Schrödinger's cat is not a sentient being. The collapse of the cat into a determined state in this mental experiment is caused by an external interaction, or "measurement". In this case several photons, or light.

Meaning a ripple in an emptiness can trigger a quantum singularity to "awaken" and cause a "big bang".

Also to the original post, I think your equivocating two different uses of infinite. An eternally expanding Universe is indeed infinite, here we are talking about spacial infinity.

The statement you bring up however refers to material infinity. The universe does not have infinite matter.
Additionally the conditions of this Universe does not seem as if it will remain eternally constant, and thus every posibility becoming exhausted is not the logical conclusion.

[Seraph]

Heres a page showing several possible "outcomes" of the universes fate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_f ... e_universe

The one that seems most likely is the "Big Rip". Because of this, an eternally expanding universe is actually not infinite but destroys itself eventually.

Science right now pretty much says that there is an end to this universe. I think this goes well with what the Bible says about the fate of this universe.

[Banky]

I was reading that astrophysicists have calculated a 95% certainty rate that the universe will continue expanding and not collapse. If this is true, wouldn't this basically mean we are living in an infinite universe? I've always read that in an infinite universe it's a mathematical fact that everything that can happen will happen. Would this be evidence for the existence of God, or at least the fact that God will eventually exist?

There is a difference between infinite size and infinite outcomes. Just because two planets move further and further apart does not imply that, some day, gravity will work in reverse......or that God will come to exist or that multiple God's would come to exist.

Even if we had, say, an infinite number of universes, there's nothing that says that they couldn't all be exactly the same.

Or, for another analogy, if you were to count to inifinity, you would never reach the number Q....even though there is an infinite amout of numbers.


I do believe, however, that your idea does raise questions about the supposed temporalness (temporality?) of the universe. I'm curious if those who believe the universe must have had a beginning, if they also believe that it must have an end. Then the question begs would this be true if we perceived time in reverse. If that were the case, then I'll contend that the same logic that implies a finite beginning given our current perception of time would also conclude a finite end (which would be perceived as a beginning) if our perceptions were reversed.

[Kurieuo]

I do believe, however, that your idea does raise questions about the supposed temporalness (temporality?) of the universe. I'm curious if those who believe the universe must have had a beginning, if they also believe that it must have an end. Then the question begs would this be true if we perceived time in reverse. If that were the case, then I'll contend that the same logic that implies a finite beginning given our current perception of time would also conclude a finite end (which would be perceived as a beginning) if our perceptions were reversed.

"Actual infinite" is the term used by philosophers in discussions of kalam style arguments and time, and it is used to express a beginningless and endless series. "Infinite" on the other hand can be understood as either an "actual infinite", or to simply mean "everlasting".

Given these understandings, time could be "infinite" in so far as it will keep on going and going towards infinity (which is not an actual number, but rather a concept signifying an endless series). Those who use kalam style arguments reason that an "actual infinite" (beginningless and endless series) existing in reality is an impossibility. These two uses of "infinite" imply temporality since they involve series of one thing following the other, and in this respect, God is neither an "actual infinite" or "infinite".

Yet there is a third sense of the infinite. For example, when God is said to be infinite, it is often meant that God possesses the property of aseity. That is, God is self-existent, being neither created or contingent upon something else.

[ttoews]

[ I'm curious if those who believe the universe must have had a beginning, if they also believe that it must have an end.

yes, at one end is the beginning....and at the other end is the present....the universe will always have existed for a finite amount of time

Then the question begs would this be true if we perceived time in reverse.

if we reversed time, then what was the present would become a fixed end in time...and we would be moving towards another fixed end in time.

If that were the case, then I'll contend that the same logic that implies a finite beginning given our current perception of time would also conclude a finite end (which would be perceived as a beginning) if our perceptions were reversed.

I am not sure I follow what you are saying....are you saying that if time is fixed at one end, then it can't be moving forward at the other?....if so, then I disagree.

[Banky]

Since you believe that it must have a beginning AND an end, then I see no contradiciton in your model.

I think there is a logical contradiction if one were to believe that that the universe must have a beginning, yet will continue infintely forward. It's not that it isn't possible to have a beginning with no end, but that the logic that leads one to believe that a beginning is necessary in not consistent with the idea that having no end is possible.

are you saying that if time is fixed at one end, then it can't be moving forward at the other?

No. I'm saying that if you believe that it must be fixed on one end....ie, because the universe can't be infinite in one direction (backward), then you should also believe that it must be fixed at the other.

I agree that it is entirely possible to be fixed at one end but not at the other, or fixed at both ends......or infinite in both directions....or everything existing at once, yet finite....or everything existing at once and infinite.....or one big giant loop.....or possibly oscilating back and forth. Each is just as plausible as the other, IMO.