2006-09-30 15:39:51 · 13 answers · asked by ★Greed★ 7 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Well based on or subject to individual preference we would not even exist with in infinite.
It would be like trying to "define" a dot that is the size of 1 pea that lay flat on a wall while blind folded.
Space may be infinite but the universe is constently exapaninding into this infinite space.
Therefore the numbers of stars in space are limted, but still to our calulations it may seem infinite.
Since of course we are just a pea on wall, that can't even been be observed correctly.
Infinite can not even be calcuated, its like ruler that never ends.
This example is why no one should want to exist for eternatiy plus being imortal.
It's like walking a plank, you can see the edge, but every step you take the plank gradualy grows another foot.
Nevertheless you would never reach the end.
That would suck!
Think about this, a point of singularity (bigbang)can not exist with in infinite space.
Fun stuff.
2006-09-30 17:05:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it quite is an rather stable question, and no person quite is conscious. This probable is completley incorrect yet it quite is how i glance at it. open up microsoft be conscious and draw a circle. this might signify the universe and it is boundary. Now draw a dot in the middle. it quite is you, the observer in the interior. Now boost the circle via dragging the corner. it quite is the increasing universe. You, the dot, will see it shifting farther away. Now, drag the two the dot and circle. You, the observer won't word something considering you're increasing on a similar fee. i don't probable understand if it quite is something like an answer yet it is style of ways I view it, would not quite make sense nevertheless.
2016-10-18 06:57:31 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not arbitrary, the universe is infinitely large and we are infinitely small nothing new that's the way it is and always was. Our whole lifespan is just a blink of Gods eye.
Doesn't mean your life is meaningless though, it is filled and fulfilled with meaning ... find it for you ...easy huh ... or hard sometimes ... I know, but finally easy when you understand.
Keep thinking,
Jonnie
2006-09-30 17:25:32 · answer #3 · answered by Jonnie 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Relative to the universe, yes, we are insignificantly small
Relative to ourselves, we are infinitely large, and most of the rest of the universe insignificant.
touche/ !
2006-09-30 17:47:31 · answer #4 · answered by million$gon 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The meaning of your question is unclear. 'arbitrarily' means 'decided in a dictatorial fashion'. So yes, we are small if you decide that we're small. If you don't care to reflect on it, perhaps we're not.
2006-09-30 15:59:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes
2006-09-30 15:42:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
i think infinitely large is an understatement and so is small. We are more like inexistent when it comes to comparing size.
2006-09-30 16:03:40 · answer #7 · answered by Cat Commander 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know one person that was arbitrarily small. Didn't last long.
2006-09-30 15:43:09 · answer #8 · answered by anon_y_muse 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
elephant is infinitely larger than an ant but elephant dies when ants attack.
2006-09-30 16:10:41 · answer #9 · answered by deepak57 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
'Large' does not define every reason or value.
2006-09-30 15:42:38 · answer #10 · answered by Psyengine 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋