if the universe is infinite.. (why ghosts, aliens and all the

No because ghosts go against the laws of everything. If they exist somewhere else theyd exist here
And as for aliens, everyone with a brain knows theyre out there somewhere. Weve spotted billions of stard with billions of planets orbiting them, plenty of which are in the habitable zone and can harbour life.

>>18094261
>If the universe is infinite everything is possible.
No.
If the universe is infinite everything that is possible exists. The impossible still does not exist.

its more like hopping to realm to realm

there are infinite numbers between 1 and 2 yet none of them is 3

>>18094269
>the laws of everything
the laws that we know

>If they exist somewhere else theyd exist here
no? on what basis do you say this?

>>18094273
most of the things in our mind are unprobable, not impossible

>>18094261
The universe is not infinite
Sorry anon :(

>>18094261
>if the universe is infinite everything is possible
this is a common misconception

File: 1450835479070.jpg (94KB, 671x367px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 671x367px

>>18094261
>if the universe is infinite everything is possible
no, stop this meme.

>>18094292
>>18094295
What are you, my grandpa?

>>18094261
>2016
>just figuring out the probability law

newfag

>>18094261
>combinate

Usually we just use the word 'combine' but I like your creativity.

>>18094261
>A planet where aliens exist
You mean another planet with life, because that's what the word alien means. That ghost planet you speak of would also be aliens.

>>18094302
what?

>>18094340
I think that you need to Google the word alien.

If I see something new in the world, it does not mean the world changed, just that I come to know something new about it. The means nature employs to be are it's own, and have been consistent since it's apparent existence.

Just because someone calls my duck and tennis racket doesn't mean either of us are wrong, because the tennis racket quacks and rapes other tennis rackets. Our lexemes need not to be conferrable for it to not be the same object in form.

When it comes to the probability of things to occur it's usually applied in an abstract, mathematical sense. The world in all it's quantifiable means, is certainly uncertain except by which is suitable in practice.

If people are so adamant to their convictions on what is true, be it though someone finds them preposterous, there may be original experience and knowledge unbeknownst to the person who is doubting that may offer reward in investigating further. Knowledge is intrinsically priceless.

>>18094373
>The means nature employs to be are it's own, and have been consistent since it's apparent existence
What did he mean by this?

i remember when i was 15 and posted shit like this. maybe this is why i cringe at most of /x/'s content now. used to love this site, 6 years ago this thread would be 200+ replies in a few hours and i'd be fascinated with it.

>>18094261
>if the universe is infinite everything is possible
Stopped reading. An infinite series of 1 will never contain a 2. Even if the Universe is infinite, there's no reason to assume that "everything is possible".

>>18094380
That just because you acknowledge something new in the world, doesn't mean the world as it is has ever been different.

If you realize that ghost are real, they have always been real, prior to your inception to ghost, and vice versa.

>>18094389
>Even if the Universe is infinite
which it isn't

>>18094283
>most of the things in our mind are unprobable, not impossible
That isn't true actually.

I can imagine a lot of things that are impossible, e.g impossible shapes.

File: 1472823271393.jpg (58KB, 540x575px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 540x575px

>>18094414
I'm the same way with even circles, never seen a perfect circle with my own eyes, but I know they're real, just like leprechauns.

>>18094426
What about the ripple caused by a raindrop falling into a puddle?

>>18094433
Perfect circles are impossible, as matter is composed of atoms which are discrete.

>>18094426
autocad with 5k display

>>18094435
what orbits a nucleus of an atom?

is the orbit elliptical?

>>18094444
electrons arent in an orbit. It's not 1913 anymore mr. 4X4

>>18094435
You can make a perfect circle through a mathemetical formula.

>>18094452
I meant in the physical sense. In reality they simply cannot exist

>>18094450
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/HAtomOrbitals.png

interesting. s1 and s2 orbitals then

ok I'll bite

I never saw so much disinfo on /x/ like in this thread
so I assume OP must be onto something

inb4 thread gets deleted

>>18094261
infinity of possibilites doesn't imply the existence of these possibilities, for instance the universe might only have biped humans because it can't do otherwise with its laws.

>>18094261
>if the universe is infinite everything is possible
No.

I can write the word "wrong" an infinite number of times and it will never spell out "faggot."

An infinite universe with infinite time means everything that is possible is certain. It does NOT suddenly make the impossible possible.

>>18094463
Orbitals are abstract (i.e - IMAGINARY; not real) areas of space where the electron is likely to be found.

QM is such that the electron basically exists at EVERY spot in the orbital until you look for it. Then it "collapses" onto a discrete spot - changing its momentum and energy state.

File: 1468379773495.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>18094261
On the other hand, the universe could be infinetly consistent. There is really no reason to assume that every possible combination of events must take place.

>>18094261
The universe is an infinite set, but it is not an infinite random set. meaning it contains an infinite amount of all possibilities , not all combinations.

>>18094273
This is probably closest to the correct answer. Still, the line between "probable" and "impossible" is totally subjective.

>>18095539
>Still, the line between "probable" and "impossible" is totally subjective.

No it isn't. Whether an event/thing is porbable or impossible may be subjective, but the line between probable and impossible is clear.

impossible - 0% chance of happening no matter the time, place, or situation.

probable - everything else

>>18094261
A) The universe isn't infnite
B)Infinite doesn't mean infinite variance
You might want to change that perspective again.

Infinity doesn't always result in every possible outcome OP.

Example

> every number from 1 to infinity
> every even number from 1 to infinity

Both are infinite, but the first one contains numbers the second will never have.

I suppose its possible for some planet whos tech completely dwarfs ours to create things that would behave like ghosts and other spoopy shit. It would seem like magic to us.

>>18094261
well... your not entirely wrong in your conclusion, but your science is off.

>>18095693
No. You're the one who's using universe to mean less than All that Is.

You're talking about the universe like it's the next biggest size in the following pattern:

planet, solar system, galaxy, supergalaxy, ?

Universe is meant to mean the largest of the large categories in that direction. Recently we've been using multi-verse to mean the category larger than universe, because of people who, like you, take universe to mean a region of size 65 billion lightyears as measured through space, and 13 billion years as measured through time.

Such a region of space/time is infinitely smaller than All that Is.

File: mpaint.png (361KB, 510x474px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 510x474px

I don't think the universe is infinite, it's measures are ridiculously high, but isn't infinite.

>>18094463
It's a misconception, they technically pop in and out of existence, like teleportation, around the atom

/x/ is like /sci/'s retarded cousin

I cannot take this fucking thread seriously with all the grammar mistakes, spelling mistakes, and made up words.
>combinate
>change for ever
>unprobable
>The means nature employs to be are it's own
>meant to mean
>5000 missing apostrophes

At least make the effort guys, for fucks sake.

File: 1472602412107.jpg (50KB, 600x656px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 600x656px

>>18096616
>5,000 missing apostrophes
Fixed that for you.

>mfw aliens and ghosts in the machine

>>18096668
touché

Pretty much.

Anything you can imagine has to exist somehow somewhere, simply because you exist.

Lots of people will tell you that ghosts already exist here. You don't have to go to another planet to find them. You can find them here.

You see, your mind creates reality.

When you're a child, you don't have much of a filter. So that's why in horror stories, it's often children that will communicate with ghosts.

As an adult, you're bombarded with society's particular viewpoint, which is that everything in the world is systematic, logical, and limited by the laws of physics. And so collectively, humanity narrows their perception to only that kind of a world.

But anybody who questions that kind of outlook will eventually arrive at the inevitable point of view that anything and everything is possible right here and now.

People believe that reality stems from matter. Actually, reality stems from consciousness. Consciousness is like a blank television screen. It's able to show any picture. It has all qualities within it.

Consciousness is dreaming you as a human being. It's also dreaming itself to be all sorts of other shit, infinite kinds really.

>>18094261

No. Even an infinite universe would still be constrained by the possible and impossible. Now an infinite number or multiverses....

>>18094261
Extra terrestrial life dosen't necessarily have to conform to our physical laws. Or any others. That's what makes them alien.

>>18097449
>Extra terrestrial life dosen't necessarily have to conform to our physical laws.
It actually absolutely does need to conform to our physical laws. Since we define "life" with those. You'd have to call whatever you are referring to something other than "life"

The universe is infinitely big and small. The only real thing that exists is energy. And energy is always greater the smaller you go down in terms of objects. Energy is stored in higher clumps as you continue the causality of objects. Time slows down the more clumps there is in a system, meanwhile time increases I'm speed the further down you go. Consider it a 6 directional approach. Up is supervenience, down is objects smaller than atoms, forward is the future of your atoms, backward is the past of our atoms and energy. To the left and right are deviations of ourselves from when the same atoms/energy reconstructed us. We will in time, redo. We won't in time, be done.

>>18097664
>I'm speed the further down you go
in* speed the further down you go
Stupid phone.

>>18094302
It's not infinite, it's constantly expanding. Like a loaf of bread in an oven

>>18094261
How the fuck does obvious bullsjit change anything? Autistic 15 year old that just discovered weed alert.

>there are infinite universes as well
>among the universes, at least one intelligence has found a way to destroy a universe
>ergo, an infinite number of intelligences have discovered universe-ending technology
>suppose they (or at least one, therefore infinite) choose to use it
>now, an infinite number of universes are ending due to this universe-ending technology
>infinity(existing universe) - infinity(ending universes) = ??

There is nothing stopping our universe from ending aside from time, but does that even apply? Maybe all universes are on the same plane of time and any intelligence that could end a universe has not yet been created in any among the multiverse.

So if we're all on the same plane of time, chances are that a multiverse doesn't exist. And also, if we're all on the same time, then everything that could happen has happened - so the only difference between universe A and B would be "causality", butterfly effect shit. Like if there was a small difference in A as compared to B - rolling 1 instead of 2. Was the 1 "predetermined"? - is the big question

So we are safe from the universe ending technology since time only applies to us, and if it applied to other universes at a different "speed" - then universe ending technology would exist. If it applied to other universes as equal to ours, then it's a race for universe-ending technology.

>>18097739

This is bollocks.
Time already applies measurably differently to you depending on factors like gravity and velocity, there is no "plane of time". Hell, everyday technologies like GPS rely on this fundamental fact, they would be extremely imprecise otherwise.

As such, rather than your statement at least one of the follow must be true:
>there are NOT infinite universes
>it is NOT possible to discover universe-ending technology
>there IS something stopping our universe ending aside from time