Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (24139)	6/30/2006 12:01:05 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

I didn't know there was a scientific end to time. There was a beginning to time, so I don't see why there won't be an end. Yes, there are infinites. It can be proven that the square root of two is an infinite series. Truly infinite! which means it never repeats. Imagine that, an infinite series of numbers that never forms a pattern. I can't imagine it, not enough neurons. I can accept the proof though. no "theory" of infinites What I meant was that there was no actual theory to account for the speculation I referenced. That is always he trouble with mixing the common usage of "theory" and "infinites" with a particular instance. That kind of mixing is the root of many fallacies. On the other hand, infinite series such as PI or the square root of two do lead to some speculation. It seems like one is likely to run out of sequences that don't form a pattern, but then again you can't in an infinite series. It seems troubling. One way of looking at it is that the sequences don't exist unless they are calculated, much like the position of a particle isn't exact until it passes through the present. TP