Wednesday, 10 October 2012

Infinity and "Middle of Existence" are Mutually Contradictive

I would say Infinity has no centre. There is only POV. An infinite amount is immeasurable, so there is no way it can be divided into two equal parts and a middle ascertained. One can only choose a coordinatised position, or view it from everywhere at the same (at all) time/s (conceptually). But even when viewing from a POV one must conceptually never slip into the erroneous interpretation of infinity
referred to from a fixed-type semantical position (position that assumes an "individual's type view" that influences language used back to explaining infinity from a POV). Hope that is understandable.

So: "If the universe (sea of multiverses) is infinite in size where would you find it's center?" is an impossible question as using my axiological stance/definitions the question contradicts itself.

And: "If time is eternal where would be the center between past and future?" By saying past and future one is taking a POV type position when constructing the question, as there is only the present when the question is asked. One could say that the present is the middle between past and future from a POV stance (a specific and limiting axiological stance) but infinity doesn't recognise your position or existence in its construction. It just is infinite and eternal. Saying "middle" when regarding eternity or infinity is for me an erroneous assumption/conceptualisation because something that has no end is not measurable, and can't be split into equal parts. To assume to be in the centre smacks of Aristotelian physics assuming the earth is the centre of the universe (false and assumptive axiological structure).



  1. Infinity could, potentially have a "center."
    Think of a mathematical line, by its definition, its infinite. but, a circle is simply a line curved in on itself, and travel along this line is infinite. But, this circle, this "continuum," still has a center, though it does not lie on this line; the place that is equidistant from all points of the curved line. This is the center, the "nexus" of the infinite universe.

  2. Your context is trying to redefine my context. In your example (which is just a conceptual translation of 3d into 2d for conceptual purposes) if one travelled out into infinity one would eventually end up moving back into the same area. This is a closed loop in which one can travel for an infinite amount of time but through a finite amount of space. You would need to cut the circle and extend the lines out to create a truly infinite existence.

    My context was specifically talking about an infinite spread of three dimensional space where one never comes back to the beginning and where one always moves into new further away from starting-point volumes. That was my axiological structure. You can't argue within my axiological structure (as in prove my claim that questions the validity of middle as a concept within my axiological structure is wrong by changing the very axiological structure/assumptions I am working under).

    Of course if we choose to change the parameters to your framework then I would agree with you :D