If the universe was infinite then would Azeroth exist

[Kharadin]

If the universe was infinite then all possible planets would exist. Not only would Azeroth exist, an infinite number of Azeroths would exist.

That's not at all the case. There would need to be infinite matter in the universe (there isn't) and the laws of physics would have to allow for an Azeroth to exist (they don't) for your statement to be accurate.

Even if we're discussing this under a multiverse framework - which I believe is what is posited by the OP - this rids us of the issue of finite matter since under a multiverse framework there must be infinite matter. Cool. However, we still require some variation on the current laws of physics that would give rise to something akin to Azeroth. This is fundamentally impossible, there is no variation on the laws of physics that would give rise of Titanic beings of magic, interdimensional portals and infinitely respawning demons.

To avoid this you could posit that if there exists an infinite number of universes there must be a universe (or several) where the physical laws give rise to magic and dragons and shit. Cool, you've fundamentally misunderstood any scientific notion of the multiverse theory but other than that, you're absolutely right. WoW must be real, QED.

- - - Updated - - -

snip

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is what happens when you've read enough of wikipedia to think you know what you're talking about but lack any formal training in science. Please disregard and/or bait into long tedious conversations about who's read about the most about tiny, irrelevant quantum mechanical thought experiments.

[schwarzkopf]

is what happens when you've read enough of wikipedia

Can't speak for wikipedia - I prefer science journals, science lectures and my own uni education to determine what is going on.

As for you and your wikipedia education, you may just miss out on some of the core features - so may I suggest doing a little more research.

Specific fields you should look into : quantum field theory and entropy.

Hope your erroneous ideas can be fixed with a bit of study there young fella.

[Cæli]

at least 40% of the voters have no idea of what infinity means

- - - Updated - - -

infinity of universes, doesn't mean infinity of possibilities.

this is an example of not getting what infinity means; infinity includes things that we can't imagine, concept we can't wrap our heads around, fairly illogical to say this infinity doesn't have to obey the rules we know, that's not the question, the question is does infinity exist in nature.

[Chonar]

The inability to disprove something doesn't mean proof.
The inability to prove something doesn't mean proof of the opposite.


Signed, every boiled down atheism vs religion conflict ever.

[Kharadin]

Can't speak for wikipedia - I prefer science journals, science lectures and my own uni education to determine what is going on.

As for you and your wikipedia education, you may just miss out on some of the core features - so may I suggest doing a little more research.

Specific fields you should look into : quantum field theory and entropy.

Hope your erroneous ideas can be fixed with a bit of study there young fella.

Oh yes, so you have a recent undergrad in astronomy/physics and you always keep up to date on emerging theory in QM/QFT and Cosmology?

Those are some big credentials, I suppose I'll have to accept you are an authority on the matter!

- - - Updated - - -

this is an example of not getting what infinity means; infinity includes things that we can't imagine, concept we can't wrap our heads around, fairly illogical to say this infinity doesn't have to obey the rules we know, that's not the question, the question is does infinity exist in nature.

That's pretty wildly incorrect buddy. Just because something is infinite doesn't somehow mean it stops making sense once you're incapable of counting it anymore.

[Inukashi]

at least 40% of the voters have no idea of what infinity means

- - - Updated - - -



this is an example of not getting what infinity means; infinity includes things that we can't imagine, concept we can't wrap our heads around, fairly illogical to say this infinity doesn't have to obey the rules we know, that's not the question, the question is does infinity exist in nature.

You sure you understand it? <:

my statement is so simple and yet true. Just because you have endless worlds, doesn't mean everything can happen.

Once again, you can have and endless amount of numbers between 0 and 1 and they will never be 2.

Even the multiverse theory everyone is throwing around says that only things that are possible within the laws of physics can happen.


So, while you are right with "things we can't imagine" can happen, it is also true that not everything is possible and I personally still believe a giant titan egg with mages on it is outside of what the laws of physics can give us in this and in every other universe.

[Cæli]

That's pretty wildly incorrect buddy. Just because something is infinite doesn't somehow mean it stops making sense once you're incapable of counting it anymore.

this is how you would like reality to be, you want it to make sense. alas, reality doesn't care. we're nothing, we think we can state the truth like you're doing, or like I'm doing, but in the end if infinity exists in nature, all of this is included in the infinity that we call reality, in a way that we can't understand so it's pointless to even talk about how it makes sense to us mere humans.

- - - Updated - - -

You sure you understand it? <:

my statement is so simple and yet true. Just because you have endless worlds, doesn't mean everything can happen.

Once again, you can have and endless amount of numbers between 0 and 1 and they will never be 2.

Even the multiverse theory everyone is throwing around says that only things that are possible within the laws of physics can happen.


So, while you are right with "things we can't imagine" can happen, it is also true that not everything is possible and I personally still believe a giant titan egg with mages on it is outside of what the laws of physics can give us in this and in every other universe.

well, if natural infinity exists, then it will include everything, including the 2. natural infinity is not like a kind of infinity we define on a sheet of paper, reality takes place in it as far as we know. maybe it's not precisely reality, and reality is our best concept to express it with our current minds.

[Kharadin]

this is how you would like reality to be, you want it to make sense. alas, reality doesn't care. we're nothing, we think we can state the truth like you're doing, or like I'm doing, but in the end if infinity exists in nature, all of this is included in the infinity that we call reality, in a way that we can't understand so it's pointless to even talk about how it makes sense to us mere humans.

Ah yes, how silly of me, I should have known that some inane, baseless pontificating could hammer my position into the ground. Thanks for correcting me so elegantly.

Some of us "mere" humans have actually devoted their time to studying mathematical and physical phenomena that we don't hide behind ignorance and can actually discuss difficult concepts like multiverses and infinite universes with some degree of understanding.

- - - Updated - - -

well, if natural infinity exists, then it will include everything, including the 2.

You heard it here first folks, 2 is between 0 and 1.

[Cæli]

Ah yes, how silly of me, I should have known that some inane, baseless pontificating could hammer my position into the ground. Thanks for correcting me so elegantly.

Some of us "mere" humans have actually devoted their time to studying mathematical and physical phenomena that we don't hide behind ignorance and can actually discuss difficult concepts like multiverses and infinite universes with some degree of understanding.

- - - Updated - - -



You heard it here first folks, 2 is between 0 and 1.

we know close to nothing. science is our high end tool to progress, but you got to acknowledge that science will not tell us the truth of reality anytime soon. we can talk about something that can't be observed/proven yet, it doesn't make it wrong. it's just not science. it's philosophy. doesn't make it wrong in the grand scheme of things, just wrong in the tool of truth seeking we made. the tool of truth seeking is only limited by our current level of knowledge, technology, and physiology, as it should be.

[Kharadin]

we know close to nothing. science is our high end tool to progress, but you got to acknowledge that science will not tell us the truth of reality anytime soon. we can talk about something that can't be observed/proven yet, it doesn't make it wrong. it's just not science. it's philosophy. doesn't make it wrong in the grand scheme of things, just wrong in the tool of truth seeking we made. the tool of truth seeking is only limited by our current level of knowledge, technology, and physiology, as it should be.

That's some more very good pontificating. Are you a fan of Deepak Chopra?

I guess being upset at not knowing everything about the universe is a good argument for never learning anything at all. Was this revealed to you in a dream? I can't imagine how else a mere human would come to such glorious, enlightened understanding.

[Cæli]

That's some more very good pontificating. Are you a fan of Deepak Chopra?

I guess being upset at not knowing everything about the universe is a good argument for never learning anything at all. Was this revealed to you in a dream? I can't imagine how else a mere human would come to such glorious, enlightened understanding.

prove me wrong.

[Kharadin]

prove me wrong.

I'd sooner attempt to prove there isn't an invisible unicorn in the sky. That is the level of intelligence you have so far demonstrated.

Don't be upset though, given your stance on 2 being between 0 and 1 you have relieved me of the burden of caring whether or not your position agrees with mine.

[Cæli]

I'd sooner attempt to prove there isn't an invisible unicorn in the sky. That is the level of intelligence you have so far demonstrated.

Don't be upset though, given your stance on 2 being between 0 and 1 you have relieved me of the burden of caring whether or not your position agrees with mine.

without creativity and intuition, science can stay stuck for a while in a model that is not close enough to the truth. don't criticize it. science needs thought experiments, philosophy to progress faster.

[Kharadin]

without creativity and intuition, science can stay stuck for a while in a model that is not close enough to the truth. don't criticize it. science needs thought experiments, philosophy to progress faster.

High tier pontificating bro. 2 still isn't between 0 and 1, though.

[Gaaz]

Assuming universe is infinite in some shape or form (yes, it is debatable as to what can be interpreted as an infinite universe - actual matter expanding from the Big Bang is finite, but a possibility of multiverse, "space" it expands to, etc... is not such a clear cut concept), then yes, there will be an infinite number of perfect copies of Azeroth. Including magic, because we are not guaranteed to have the same laws of physics in another part of the universe (multiverse). There might (must if infinity is assumed) be a region or a universe that has a different combination of weak and strong forces (like magnetism, gravity etc...) and thus would allow things that would seem like magic to us.
PS: Also, I would like to say hi to the infinite number of me who type this sentence at this very moment in another part of our reality / different realities.

[lagiacrux]

i mean, not they way we know azeroth right now.

even if the universe is infinite, the laws of physics still reign supreme.

[Cæli]

High tier pontificating bro. 2 still isn't between 0 and 1, though.

pontificating = say something in a dogmatic way
dogmatic = say something as if it was undeniably true

I said "we think we can state the truth like you're doing, or like I'm doing, but (...)"

therefore I don't state my opinions as if it was the truth
therefore it is not dogmatic
therefore it is not pontificating

you should also accept that you can be wrong in the grand scheme of thing.
nature also doesn't care about our axiomes. axiomes are the truth for us because we got to start building things up on a set of things we consider as true.

[Kharadin]

pontificating = say something in a dogmatic way
dogmatic = say something as if it was undeniably true

I said "we think we can state the truth like you're doing, or like I'm doing, but (...)"

therefore I don't state my opinions as if it was the truth
therefore it is not dogmatic
therefore it is not pontificating

you should also accept that you can be wrong in the grand scheme of thing.
nature also doesn't care about our axiomes. axiomes are the truth for us because we got to start building things up on a set of things we consider as true.

Ah, I see, so I should consider that I can be wrong because you post pontificating nothings on the internet? Gotcha buddy. Thank you for letting me see the error of my ways. I'll send my regards to Deepak Chopra for you.

[xenogear3]

there's planets that rain diamonds and glass and a planet that is pitch black and has crazy temperatures and does all sorts of crazy shit. the universe doesnt have to make sense

Which "scientists" are actually on these planets? None.
They are just guessing.

On topic, anything is possible except we never see it.
From our perceptive, it doesn't exist.

[Cæli]

Ah, I see, so I should consider that I can be wrong because you post pontificating nothings on the internet? Gotcha buddy. Thank you for letting me see the error of my ways. I'll send my regards to Deepak Chopra for you.

you should consider that you can be wrong because you don't know the truth.

you might have a problem with your self-pride. you imagine things such as me writing "pontificating" things which I've proven wrong, or things such as that I know who is "Deepak Chopra" when I never heard of him, so you're wrong again...
maybe you try to reassure yourself. well too bad. humility is required in science. humility highlights our ignorance. if we're not ignorant, then why bother researching. scientists are ignorant in a way, they lack knowledge. if they weren't, they wouldn't need to search and wouldn't discover anything.
but anyway, since it all boils down to pride, doesn't make much sense to keep debating, I've made my point already. a little pride can be good too I'll give you that!