Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy

In terms of large or infinite structures in the known universe no infinite structure has ever been observed, ( I wonder why?)

Have you ever seen your own butthole?

Well put. Thank you for stating this.

And we don't care if you don't know something. We really don't. Everybody here (or at least most of us are more than happy to explain or help you learn anything relevant.

There is a surprising, perhaps to you, amount of knowledge being used by both sides of the argument here. It's easy to assume its all bollocks - I get it. You are on the flat earth society forums. There are a fair amount of ideas here that an orthodox view would ignore out of hand. On the other hand, it's not often I see someone use math incorrectly and the other side doesn't smash them for it instantly.

Stay a bit and learn the culture.

I think you should learn the science.
I think the real problem here is you really don't understand the concept of infinity. All the way through you confuse the concept of a mathematical or a metaphysical infinity with a physical one. For reasons I have mentioned before an infinite anything could not exist in the real world, just think about it. It can be big, it can be really big, but not infinite.

Just as I remember  Einstein said, "only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." 

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

In terms of large or infinite structures in the known universe no infinite structure has ever been observed, ( I wonder why?)

Have you ever seen your own butthole?

 Einstein said, "only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."  I think you prove the latter. Is that you run out of things to say. I think you restoring to that remark tells me I've won the argument, and convinced me you really don't understand the concept of infinity.

In terms of large or infinite structures in the known universe no infinite structure has ever been observed, ( I wonder why?)

Perhaps because of size?

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

In terms of large or infinite structures in the known universe no infinite structure has ever been observed, ( I wonder why?)

Perhaps because of size?

You really don't get it, the concept of physical infinity do you? and how you imagine you and all you know can exist separately from it. Just think about it and tell me what you think.

You keep telling people to "just think about it." I suggest you take some time to do just that. Don't think for one moment that your shifting of the goalposts again is going unnoticed.

I think Cantor has a lot to answer for when he said that some infinities are bigger than others.
Many people think that there can be an infinite number of objects in the universe.
Some people think there can be infinite flat earth existing in the universe, problematic if you actually think about it, whether they think the universe is finite or infinite I'm not sure, but I suppose the concept of an infinite flat earth existing in a finite universe has a bit of a problem from the word go as does the physical concept of an infinite earth inside an infinite universe. Whichever way you wish to square it despite what 'all' the people are saying any rational thought experiment considering the idea of an infinite flat earth holds no water and is therefore officially busted.
John Davis mentioned Gauss, he, Carl Friedrich Gauss actually said “Infinity is merely a way of speaking” and “I protest against the use of infinite magnitude as something completed, which is never permissible in mathematics.”

You keep telling people to "just think about it." I suggest you take some time to do just that. Don't think for one moment that your shifting of the goalposts again is going unnoticed.

Unlike most people on this forum, I have been thinking about it.
Tell me where the goalposts were originally and where they are now located.

Quote from: Bullwinkle on January 11, 2020, 07:54:33 AM

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

In terms of large or infinite structures in the known universe no infinite structure has ever been observed, ( I wonder why?)

Perhaps because of size?

You really don't get it, the concept of physical infinity do you? and how you imagine you and all you know can exist separately from it. Just think about it and tell me what you think.

You have observed infinity?
Tell me all about it.

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 09:02:19 AM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on January 11, 2020, 07:54:33 AM

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

In terms of large or infinite structures in the known universe no infinite structure has ever been observed, ( I wonder why?)

Perhaps because of size?

You really don't get it, the concept of physical infinity do you? and how you imagine you and all you know can exist separately from it. Just think about it and tell me what you think.

You have observed infinity?
Tell me all about it.

Again you misunderstand, but at least you're consistent. It was the Davis man with his ill-fated and illogical Davis Plane who was somehow seeing infinity. Ask him. Perhaps he needs new glasses.
Infinity in the physical world probably does not exist. I've been saying that since the beginning, but you people are so slowwwww on the uptake.
The initial clue was in my original statement. `Infinite earth, infinite atoms, infinit...energy, gravity, mass etc... But people were too caught up in their narrow beliefs and brown-nosing each other to put their brains into gear. How you doing by the way, caught up yet?

If no one comes in with an intelligent response. I think Bullwinkles, using bumhole tends to put one in the unintelligent arena,  and the other moderator who spends all his time playing with his Avatar, cant remember the name, body something. I will claim a victory for sense and reason.  I get the feeling John Davis has ran away possibly deleting the infinite Davis plane, which may well take a long time given its size. The Curious one should spend less time telling other people off for using bad arguments and focus more on his own bad arguments.

They produced some extremely dubious maths from a dubious source that they asserted ‘proved’ an infinite plane of thickness 4000 miles or so would have a finite gravity of around that of the earth. I would say to them that both they and the ‘mathematician’ that did the calculation do not understand infinity.

I would say you are the one who fails to understand.
Yes, you made a mistake by saying that an infinite plane has infinite gravity.
It has an infinite gravitational well, but the gravitational acceleration is finite.

I notice that while you dismiss the math as dubious, you were unable to show any problem with it.

Before running off to another topic, why not deal with your claim that it should collapse into a black hole?

How about we try a real reflection?

You have baselessly asserted that an finite plane should collapse into a black hole and has infinite gravity.
You did this by treating it as if it is just a really big finite plane.
You then just dismissed any argument which shows you are wrong, with the same assertions.

Do you accept that an infinite plane wouldn't collapse into a black hole, and that the the acceleration due to gravity is finite?

It has been shown that if the object is made of ice then it becomes spherical when it reaches 400km in diameter or 600 if rock. This appears to be a fairly universal law and another reason despite the maths of John Davis that a flat body even finite and the size of the earth, could not exist.

Yes, a FINITE body, not an infinite one.

Tell me where the goalposts were originally and where they are now located.

Well you seemed to be discussing the gravity associated with an infinite plane and how it would cause it to collapse into a black hole.
Then after that was refuted, without even admitting it was refuted, you now seem to have run to a far more philosophical discussion of if an infinite plain could even exist in the first place, at least with other things existing as well.

Why not stick with the initial goalposts?

Infinity in the physical world probably does not exist. I've been saying that since the beginning

Really?
Because before it seems like you were saying with certainty that it can't exist, not just that it probably doesn't.

Are we talking about what is possible, or just what exists in this universe?

The Curious one should spend less time telling other people off for using bad arguments and focus more on his own bad arguments.

Timeisup should also considering following that advice.

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

They produced some extremely dubious maths from a dubious source that they asserted ‘proved’ an infinite plane of thickness 4000 miles or so would have a finite gravity of around that of the earth. I would say to them that both they and the ‘mathematician’ that did the calculation do not understand infinity.

I would say you are the one who fails to understand.
Yes, you made a mistake by saying that an infinite plane has infinite gravity.
It has an infinite gravitational well, but the gravitational acceleration is finite.

I notice that while you dismiss the math as dubious, you were unable to show any problem with it.

Before running off to another topic, why not deal with your claim that it should collapse into a black hole?

How about we try a real reflection?

You have baselessly asserted that an finite plane should collapse into a black hole and has infinite gravity.
You did this by treating it as if it is just a really big finite plane.
You then just dismissed any argument which shows you are wrong, with the same assertions.

Do you accept that an infinite plane wouldn't collapse into a black hole, and that the the acceleration due to gravity is finite?

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

It has been shown that if the object is made of ice then it becomes spherical when it reaches 400km in diameter or 600 if rock. This appears to be a fairly universal law and another reason despite the maths of John Davis that a flat body even finite and the size of the earth, could not exist.

Yes, a FINITE body, not an infinite one.

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 09:17:58 AM

Tell me where the goalposts were originally and where they are now located.

Well you seemed to be discussing the gravity associated with an infinite plane and how it would cause it to collapse into a black hole.
Then after that was refuted, without even admitting it was refuted, you now seem to have run to a far more philosophical discussion of if an infinite plain could even exist in the first place, at least with other things existing as well.

Why not stick with the initial goalposts?

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 11:10:43 AM

Infinity in the physical world probably does not exist. I've been saying that since the beginning

Really?
Because before it seems like you were saying with certainty that it can't exist, not just that it probably doesn't.

Are we talking about what is possible, or just what exists in this universe?

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 11:17:50 AM

The Curious one should spend less time telling other people off for using bad arguments and focus more on his own bad arguments.

Timeisup should also considering following that advice.

In my opinion, you are the one who is totally wrong as you are one of the group who has misinterpreted the concept of infinite when it is in relation to the physical world.  How can you say that infinite mass does not equal infinite gravity?  You are missing the whole point of this thought experiment by disappearing down some mythical rabbit hole of your own creation. Remember infinity is not a number and cant be treated as one.
The problem is the idea of an infinite structure within an infinite or finite universe is impossible. As I keep saying, just think about it! If something is infinite it doesn't leave much room for anything else does it? Or do you think things can exist outwith reality? If the earth were an infinite plane with infinite mass/energy/gravity etc etc. what about the rest of the universe. What you are trying to do, very badly I may say, is misusing science to look at a pseudoscientific impossibility.
Let start with what we do know. Objects greater than 600km in diameter become spherical. That is a known fact.
Objects and they are always spherical, with solar masses greater than around twenty solar masses or so tend to end their lives as black holes. This is known through observation. Once a structure became that large it would be spherical by default and ultimately collapse under its own gravity.
In your own words please describe the unknown forces or circumstances that would allow an object to grow larger, become flat, and then attain infinite dimensions, whatever that actually means? Would your flat earth be an infinite number of inches miles or kilometers in length? I would really love to hear your answer.
These are the real things we actually know about.
Do you honestly think our understanding of the laws of physics allows for infinite objects? Do you honestly think you have any idea of how one would behave either as a thought experiment or in some parallel universe that allows such things? I think few if any scientists of any discipline would agree with your point of view.
You are deluding yourself if you think you have some insight or knowledge on the subject of infinite planes. As far as I can see no one does.
You want some real maths to chew on...chew on this.
https://www.astro.uu.se/~hoefner/astro/teach/apd_files/apd_collapse.pdf
Answer this, do you honestly think an infinite flat earth could exist in a finite or infinite universe?

Tim Eisup is pissed off

Where the misunderstanding is coming from, and it's actually quite funny and ironic. The term flat earth. Possibly that should have been better defined at the start.
If by flat earth it was meant as a world like our own then the possibility of an infinite plane theoretical or real is nil, zero, naught.  As I originally stated. In the world of a possible theoretical infinite flat earth, this flat plane would have to be of absolute uniform density and thickness, like float glass, containing no irregularities possibly with infinite rigidity. Any slight irregularity in this infinite structure would cause an imbalance and the whole lot would collapse, most likely into a sphere and then some supermassive black hole. I think this is what I said at the outset.
I stand with my initial assertion I made at the start of this as I took the term infinite flat earth to mean, an earth-like structure like ours but infinite.

Any theoretical simplistic mathematical formulae that you may have come across which deals with the amusing theoretical possibility of an infinite plane existing is referring to a perfect plane of uniform density and rigidity existing in a universe that is not our own. The gravity on such an object due to its perfect structure would possibly be perpendicular to the surface and not infinite. This would most definitely NOT be the case on a theoretical infinite plane whose structure and terrain was the same as our own world.

I hope that clears up any possible misunderstanding.

You continue to be wrong in your assertions. Please justify the following statement: "this flat plane would have to be of absolute uniform density and thickness, like float glass, containing no irregularities possibly with infinite rigidity."

Tim Eisup is pissed off

When dealing with people who can't, or don't want to, see beyond the end of their own noses, or bumholes in your case, and only want to see what they want can be a bit frustrating.
The internet is great but it's not a substitute for education. I can see what has happened. Some bright spark put up some maths for fun showing the 'theoretical possibility of a perfect flat plane' The word theoretically needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. Some flat earthers and other then pounced on this as possible proof for a flat earth without really understanding the parameters or the scope of the exercise. As I said before in the light of this revelation Mr. Davis is going to have to rethink his Davis Plane.

You continue to be wrong in your assertions. Please justify the following statement: "this flat plane would have to be of absolute uniform density and thickness, like float glass, containing no irregularities possibly with infinite rigidity."

Go and read properly the original paper the mathematics you undoubtedly have come across in a 2nd or 3rd hand way actually says and the parameters it describes.

Am I to understand that you can't actually back up your assertion? You are, after all, the one who made the claim. Can you support it?

... I think that a thought experiment on the earth as an infinite plane could be said to be entertaining.
the earth is an infinite plane it would therefore follow;
the earth would have infinite mass
the earth would have infinite gravity as a result of the infinite mass
light would not be able to escape the infinite gravitational field
the earth by implication would have to collapse into a black hole to obey the laws of physics
We would not and never have existed due to the earth being a black hole

If a thought experiment is to have any ultimate logical scientific credibility at some time it has to engage with known scientific truths. In this instance we can see through just thinking about it the earth could never be an infinite plane in this universe obeying its rules. An infinite earth could only exist in another universe with very different laws or exist in someone’s imagination.

ergo, in this universe the earth is not an infinite plane, flat or otherwise.

Reminder, this is the thought experiment you chose to engage in. Is there any part of this you'd like to now admit you may have misunderstood?

In my opinion, you are the one who is totally wrong

Can you back up your claim that an infinite plane would collapse into a black hole?
Can you show a problem with the math which clearly indicates it will not?
Can you answer any of the questions which show it will not?


If not, then you are the one who is wrong.

Again, stop trying to change the subject, deal with this first. If you admit that it will not collapse, or conversely show that it will, then we can move on and discuss other issues.

How can you say that infinite mass does not equal infinite gravity?

Infinite A does not necessitate infinite B.
It has been explained how you have finite gravitational acceleration at any point. If you wish to claim it is infinite, perhaps you can demonstrate that it is rather than just repeating the assertions?

You are missing the whole point of this thought experiment

No, you seem to have fallen victim to exactly what I first indicated was a problem.
You are assuming a conclusion with nothing to back it up.

Do the thought experiment properly. You will find out that an infinite plane is stable.

Remember infinity is not a number and cant be treated as one.

So strop treating it like one then.
Stop acting like an infinite plane is just some finite object larger than an arbitrary threshold.
Stop appealing to how finite objects work.

Let start with what we do know. Objects greater than 600km in diameter become spherical. That is a known fact.

No, it isn't. It needs some very important qualifiers.
Firstly, the object needs to be roughly solid. For example, we know of galaxies which span over 100 thousand light years, yet they aren't spherical.
But the one which is more important for this conversation is that these objects are FINITE!

Do you know WHY these objects become roughly spherical?
Do you know if that reason still holds for an infinite object?
"Remember infinity is not a number and cant be treated as one."
Stop stop acting like this hypothetical infinite plane is just a very large finite plane.

In your own words please describe the unknown forces or circumstances that would allow an object to grow larger, become flat, and then attain infinite dimensions, whatever that actually means?

And there you go trying to move the goalposts again.


Again, deal with your claims of infinite gravity causing it to collapse into a black hole. Then move on.

Would your flat earth be an infinite number of inches miles or kilometers in length?

It isn't mine, but yes, it would be.

Do you honestly think you have any idea of how one would behave either as a thought experiment or in some parallel universe that allows such things?

Do you?
You sure seem to just pretend it is another finite object, completely ignoring that it is infinite.


But yes, I do understand.
In fact, a lot of science actually appeals to that.
Several things are based upon the idea of an infinite plane or an infinite rod.

Yes, in reality  it is an approximation and when you are too close to the edge or too far away the approximation fails.

You are deluding yourself if you think you have some insight or knowledge on the subject of infinite planes. As far as I can see no one does.

Yet here you are, deluding yourself and acting like you know it all.

this flat plane would have to be of absolute uniform density and thickness, like float glass, containing no irregularities possibly with infinite rigidity. Any slight irregularity in this infinite structure would cause an imbalance and the whole lot would collapse

And there you go with more claims as if you know everything about infinite objects.
Can you show any of this?
Are you sure that is the case and it isn't actually a variation of some magnitude will cause the collapse.

I think this is what I said at the outset.

It isn't. You made no appeal to any irregularity.
Instead you appealed to the infinite mass.
Let me remind you:

Yes I think that a thought experiment on the earth as an infinite plane could be said to be entertaining.
the earth is an infinite plane it would therefore follow;
the earth would have infinite mass
the earth would have infinite gravity as a result of the infinite mass
light would not be able to escape the infinite gravitational field
the earth by implication would have to collapse into a black hole to obey the laws of physics
We would not and never have existed due to the earth being a black hole

So it seems more likely covering your mistakes than clearing up misunderstandings.
But don't worry, as I said above, it is still baseless.

If you would like a comparison, it is akin to claiming Earth must be a perfect sphere.
After all, Earth is greater than that 600 km threshold, so why doesn't it become a perfect sphere?

Is it because you actually need a significant enough irregularity before something happens to remove it?
That a small enough irregularity (such a mountain) can exist without causing a problem?

When dealing with people who can't, or don't want to, see beyond the end of their own noses, or bumholes in your case, and only want to see what they want can be a bit frustrating.

Yes, dealing with you can be frustrating.

Try to actually defend your claims rather than just doubling down and making more.

I was in the pub last night talking to a couple of pals of mine one of whom happens to be a prof at a local university in mathematics.

And you didn't bother talking to them about the mathematical derivation of the gravitational field of an infinite plane? When you had an academic who you seem to trust in front of you? Who would be able to verify the math?

They produced some extremely dubious maths from a dubious source that they asserted ‘proved’ an infinite plane of thickness 4000 miles or so would have a finite gravity of around that of the earth.

"Extremely dubious maths" = "Oh, shit, I don't understand this! If only I knew someone who could explain it to me ... someone who was in front of me ... like at a pub ..."

For example, think about this. If the earth were an infinite plane, made up of an infinite amount of matter how can there then be any other matter in the universe?

Thinking doesn't appear to be your strong suit.

Here's a thought experiment for you.
Postulate an infinite universe.
Construct a plane.
On one side of the plane, imagine a uniform density of matter.
The amount of matter in the filled half of the universe is therefore infinite.
You're arguing that no matter can exist in the opposite side of the plane? Or that the opposite side itself cannot exist?

Half of an infinite number of points is infinite.

How can you say that infinite mass does not equal infinite gravity?

Because it doesn't. Talk to your professor pal.

Have another thought experiment:
1. An infinite universe consists of nothing but a uniform density of gas at the level of the density of interstellar space, approximately 1 atom per cubic centimeter.
2. Therefore the number of atoms is infinite.
3. Therefore the amount of matter in the universe is infinite.
4. Is the gravitational field *anywhere* in the universe other than zero?
5. And, barring any other force that perturbs the uniform density of the universe (i.e., consider only the force of gravity), will the gravitational field *ever* be anything other than zero?

You continue to be wrong in your assertions. Please justify the following statement: "this flat plane would have to be of absolute uniform density and thickness, like float glass, containing no irregularities possibly with infinite rigidity."

It’s certainly  not my claim.  I just checked it out and actually read it and understood it. You also have to remember it was partly done as a gimmick. The fact that you flat earth bunch jumped on it without understanding it is not my problem .
The point is rather mute as we have come to a juncture where the assertions I have made are correct and that is that. Go check it out and see what you find.

It’s certainly  not my claim.

You are the one here making it, so it is your claim.
Now can you defend it?
Or can you only make a bunch of baseless assertions and run away when they are questioned or refuted?

The point is rather mute as we have come to a juncture where the assertions I have made are correct and that is that.

No, they are completely false. They have been refuted, and you just dismiss the refutations.

The juncture we are at is that you have come in making a bunch of assertions without understanding, and now are running away because you can't defend them and don't want to admit to your mistakes.

If you want to flee because you can't defend your claims, go ahead. But the rational way to do so is not by reasserting that you are correct with no defence of your claims.

Good job being just like skepty and Sandy.

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

I was in the pub last night talking to a couple of pals of mine one of whom happens to be a prof at a local university in mathematics.

And you didn't bother talking to them about the mathematical derivation of the gravitational field of an infinite plane? When you had an academic who you seem to trust in front of you? Who would be able to verify the math?

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

They produced some extremely dubious maths from a dubious source that they asserted ‘proved’ an infinite plane of thickness 4000 miles or so would have a finite gravity of around that of the earth.

"Extremely dubious maths" = "Oh, shit, I don't understand this! If only I knew someone who could explain it to me ... someone who was in front of me ... like at a pub ..."

Quote from: Timeisup on January 11, 2020, 07:15:21 AM

For example, think about this. If the earth were an infinite plane, made up of an infinite amount of matter how can there then be any other matter in the universe?

Thinking doesn't appear to be your strong suit.

Here's a thought experiment for you.
Postulate an infinite universe.
Construct a plane.
On one side of the plane, imagine a uniform density of matter.
The amount of matter in the filled half of the universe is therefore infinite.
You're arguing that no matter can exist in the opposite side of the plane? Or that the opposite side itself cannot exist?

Half of an infinite number of points is infinite.

ASI have said, save you’re breath and go look at the original paper, not some 4th hand rehash you posted.

I think you need to go back and rethink your thought experiment. Remember infinity is not a number and here we are dealing with a theoretical physical infinity. Your logic is incorrect.

Quote from: boydster on January 11, 2020, 02:20:09 PM

You continue to be wrong in your assertions. Please justify the following statement: "this flat plane would have to be of absolute uniform density and thickness, like float glass, containing no irregularities possibly with infinite rigidity."

It’s certainly  not my claim.  I just checked it out and actually read it and understood it. You also have to remember it was partly done as a gimmick. The fact that you flat earth bunch jumped on it without understanding it is not my problem .
The point is rather mute as we have come to a juncture where the assertions I have made are correct and that is that. Go check it out and see what you find.

*moot*

I think you need to go back and rethink your thought experiment. Remember infinity is not a number and here we are dealing with a theoretical physical infinity. Your logic is incorrect.

You are projecting your own inadequacies onto others.

The entirety of your argument is based upon treating infinity as a number; treating the infinite plane as just a very big finite object.

Like I asked before, do you even understand why the arguments you are making work for finite objects?

Let's give Tim a break.
I feel he's 10 minutes away from kicking his mommie's knee for not cooking him mac n cheese. 

Sorry Timeisup, but for once I have to concur with John. 

If we forget about whether it’s physically plausible, all the evidence regarding the shape of the earth, etc.  and are only consider whether an infinite plane could produce 9.8m/s/s gravity on the surface, then it appears the answer is yes.  It works mathematically, even using Newton’s Law of Universal gravitation.

Provided the plane is actually truly infinite.  It can’t just be so enormous it seems infinite to us, because then somewhere there’s an edge and a centre, and then it would collapse in on itself.  I think it would also need to have a finite thickness.

The reason it works mathematically is the force has an inverse square relationship with distance.  Say we divide the surface into small areas and sum up the gravitational force of each area to give a total value for g.  The effect of distant areas drops off faster than they add up.

A simpler example of the principle is summing the following geometric number series:

1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + ...

You can sum as many terms in this series as you like, it won’t even get up to 2.

So despite the earth having infinite mass, the gravitational force of that mass on something on or near the surface is actually finite.

None of that makes an infinite plane a credible hypothesis, it just means that on this particular point, the maths checks out.

It’s a good example of a thought experiment.  There’s no evidence that the earth is an infinite plane and no good reason to suspect it might be, but we can still investigate the implications of that idea.  It’s not the only type of thought experiment though.