Is Knowledge Infinite?

[Incandio]

The question isn't "Can humans know everything?" or even "What is knowledge?" The question refers to the possibility that what there is to be known is without limit.

Let's reduce knowledge, then, to simple arithmetic, just for the sake of argument. If we can prove that knowledge in this branch of, er, knowledge is infinite, then we can say that knowledge is certainly infinite if we take into account all the other areas of, er, knowledge.

So, arithmetic. The answer to the question, 1+1=? is something that is known. The answer to the question, 1+2=? is also known. However, numbers themselves are infinite, and 1+?=? is a simple sum that can be rewritten an infinite number of times.

If we take language, I can say, "How big is your big cat?" Then I can say, "How big is a cat that is bigger than your cat?" Then I can say, "How big is a big cat that is bigger than the big cat that is bigger than your cat?" Then I can say, "How big is the big cat that is bigger than the big cat that is bigger than the big cat that is bigger than your cat?" And so on.

From this we can see that knowledge is certainly infinite. But we can also see that it doesn't matter whether it's infinite or not, because what makes it infinite is the useless garbage that nobody needs to know about.

QED.

[Biggles Worth]

Infinite, we meet again.

[Raphtheone]

Knowledge isn't infinite. There's only such much information and how it all relates to one another. In order for knowledge to be infinite, the realm of existence (and realms outside where we can siphon information from) has to be infinite too.

We'll I believe knowledge is infinite. So on the basis that knowledge I will make this argument.

Imagine knowledge on a number line stretching from zero to infinite. If that is true the problem is now matter much much we know at any point on that line, we know next to zero because infinity keeps growing making our conception of current know smaller and smaller and close and closer to zero.

Soo...The conclusion is inescapable our knowledge will always be rapidly approaching zero. TLDR we will never have any knowledge of anything.

Imagine every human had a number over their head. Every year we get more and more humans, and the amount of lottery tickets sold as well. Since the odds of winning the grand prize is always almost zero, the more people playing the lottery, the more tickets will be sold, and the less people will win it. In the end no one will win it!

---------- Post added 2012-10-06 at 10:28 PM ----------

Quite possible. Some say infinity is not a real concept and that nothing is infinite; however, no one can know this. The Universe 'could' be infinite. The human mind cannot comprehend the concept of infinity - never ending. Just because it can't be comprehended doesn't mean it's false.

I would dare to say that it is likely that knowledge is infinite.

In order for the universe to be infinite today, it had to be infinite at creation. It also means that the universe can't expand. If the universe was finite at creation, and expanded, at what point did it become infinite? What's infinity divided by two? A finite number, or still infinity? Half-infinity?

This speaking as a person who don't believe infinity exists.

[Grizzly Willy]

Until we get to the point that we are no longer asking questions and able to are predict everything, knowledge will be virtually infinite, and I honestly doubt that we would stop questioning the realm we exist in.

[Sunseeker]

Yes, because knowledge continues to be generated. New things are made, new people are born, new ways of doing founded, new thoughts are thought.

By your argument it may appear that we know little compared to what could be known, but that does not change the fact that we still know a great deal.

[ptwonline]

What do you think the difference between "infinite" and "without limit"?

Infinite means that it takes up EVERYTHING.

Without limit means that it is not infinite, but there is nothing to stop it from growing.

For example, imagine that you could accelerate a ship to infinite speed. It would then exist in every single bit of the universe at the same time. Instead imagine a ship that would accelerate at 100 mph and never stop accelerating. It would be without limit, but never infinite.

[Deleted]

Information is infinite. Even if you somehow manage to know everything that has happened until one point, whatever happens from that point on generates new information. As long as things move in the universe, they generate new information aka knowledge, forever.

[semaphore]

As long as the universe continues to change, the body of potential knowledge will continue grow. I guess it's effectively infinite?

[s_bushido]

We'll I believe knowledge is infinite. So on the basis that knowledge I will make this argument.

Imagine knowledge on a number line stretching from zero to infinite. If that is true the problem is now matter much much we know at any point on that line, we know next to zero because infinity keeps growing making our conception of current know smaller and smaller and close and closer to zero.

Soo...The conclusion is inescapable our knowledge will always be rapidly approaching zero. TLDR we will never have any knowledge of anything.

That's an interesting philosophical dilemma, but I'm not sure how well it would hold up in practical terms. And since it's based on a question we can't possibly answer yet, I don't think it's all that useful to think about. Our species has come a very long way in a relatively short amount of time. Going from smashing rocks together to splitting the atom in a few thousand years...in a universe that's billions of years old...just imagine what we'll know a few thousand years from now (assuming we don't kill eachother off before then).

[Earris]

Let us assume that humanity survives long enough.
Let us further assume that we still will be interested in learning stuff.
Let us further assume that we can gather all possible information.

Then we could not store it cause to store all information about what happened to the point at which we store it would actually need more storage space than we could possible have in this universe assuming that we store everything (what happened to every single part of the universe from the smallest sub particle to the largest galaxies and beyond.)

Let us assume we have some way of distinguishing of what is important and what is not for example:

All we know and ever will know about how the Universe works all the physics and math behind it we declare as important.

But everything that does not change the behavior of the universe like everything on Earth that humans have done to this point (and probably will ever do (my opinion)).

Assuming this rather harsh line of dividing Knowledge we could well learn everything and probably even store the data if we do not store the history of everything and just the "rules for everything".

Edit:

Basically what i was trying to say is who do we define Knowledge.

[cubby]

Infinite means that it takes up EVERYTHING.

Without limit means that it is not infinite, but there is nothing to stop it from growing.

For example, imagine that you could accelerate a ship to infinite speed. It would then exist in every single bit of the universe at the same time. Instead imagine a ship that would accelerate at 100 mph and never stop accelerating. It would be without limit, but never infinite.

Ah, ok - I see where you went there. The question here is about something that isn't necessarily tangible, like a thought. So it's "infiniteness" wouldn't take up the entirely of the universe. Also, even something that is tangible, like a line, could be infinite and not take up the whole of the universe - it would just be without end. So I don't think your definition of infinite is correct.

Also, infinite is commonly defined as "without limits" - so they are synonyms.

[Shink]

it's finite, unless somehow someway you gain access to the akashic records, then i'd say infinite

You can only know so much till you die, then information still goes on by creating new things to know about, which you can't know of because you are dead, it's finite, to you, as a human, it's infinite, as in overall, things will always be created to where someone will discover it and learn of it

[l4808]

We'll I believe knowledge is infinite. So on the basis that knowledge I will make this argument.

Imagine knowledge on a number line stretching from zero to infinite. If that is true the problem is now matter much much we know at any point on that line, we know next to zero because infinity keeps growing making our conception of current know smaller and smaller and close and closer to zero.

Soo...The conclusion is inescapable our knowledge will always be rapidly approaching zero. TLDR we will never have any knowledge of anything.

Asking whether or not knowledge is infinite is a kind of... bad thought out question.

All that is, is not, can be, could be, would be, should be, will be - Is knowledge. Any calculation that points to the answer infinite, is already an answer to your question.

[chazus]

Pretty much a scientific answer.

Is knowledge infinite, in that will there always be more information to know? Yes, of course. Each moment of time generates new information.

Is knowledge that any one person can know infinite? No. People can only know so much, and information is lost or archived in a way that either can be easily recalled, or not. Some people are better than others at withholding information longer, just as one apple may taste better than another, but there are limitations to how much we can know.

[l4808]

Pretty much a scientific answer.

Is knowledge infinite, in that will there always be more information to know? Yes, of course. Each moment of time generates new information.

Is knowledge that any one person can know infinite? No. People can only know so much, and information is lost or archived in a way that either can be easily recalled, or not. Some people are better than others at withholding information longer, just as one apple may taste better than another, but there are limitations to how much we can know.

Well scientifically said, no. if you had all knowledge about a location in the universe, you would be able to know what was going to happen there, and when, before it happens. So time won't create more knowledge in that sense.

[Zdrasti]

Depends on what you define as knowledge. Without a precise definition in place your question is meaningless.

To put that in perspective, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle means that you cannot simultaneously know a particle's position and momentum. So you cannot even have perfect knowledge on the state of one particle in our universe. But again, that's not likely what you meant by knowledge, so you will need to define it properly to have a well posed question.

[ptwonline]

Ah, ok - I see where you went there. The question here is about something that isn't necessarily tangible, like a thought. So it's "infiniteness" wouldn't take up the entirely of the universe. Also, even something that is tangible, like a line, could be infinite and not take up the whole of the universe - it would just be without end. So I don't think your definition of infinite is correct.

Also, infinite is commonly defined as "without limits" - so they are synonyms.

Knowledge can be broken down tangibly since it is a biochemical/electrical activity in your brain, or else stored on some sort of other medium.

[cubby]

Knowledge can be broken down tangibly since it is a biochemical/electrical activity in your brain, or else stored on some sort of other medium.

The ability to store knowledge is mutually exclusive to it's being infinite or not.

-it's not knowledge's fault that we can't store it more efficiently
-other species/races/beings could store knowledge differently

[Zdrasti]

The ability to store knowledge is mutually exclusive to it's being infinite or not.

I'm pretty sure "mutually exclusive" is not the term you were looking for. Perhaps "does not affect." That being said, one still needs a definition of knowledge and looking at how its stored might be a reasonable way to tangibly describe it. I point you in the direction of Shannon Entropy.

[cubby]

I'm pretty sure "mutually exclusive" is not the term you were looking for. Perhaps "does not affect." That being said, one still needs a definition of knowledge and looking at how its stored might be a reasonable way to tangibly describe it. I point you in the direction of Shannon Entropy.

I think you are correct (I just love that phrase). Not sure about the need of a definition of knowledge, although I think I see where you are going from a cursory glace at Shannon Entropy. Will learn more and come back.