• hperrin@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    4 days ago

    I mean, yeah. Compared to infinity, the number of particles in the universe is essentially zero.

      • hperrin@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        Even if it is infinite, that still pales in comparison to infinity. Infinity is weird.

        • very_well_lost@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          True. If the universe is infinite, the number of particles would only be a lowly countable Infinity. How pathetic!

        • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          It blew my mind when someone explained to me how some sets of infinity numbers can be infinite yet still technically larger than other sets, like the set of all numbers vs. the set of all odd numbers.

          • Fleur_@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Yes that’s right, but I’d like to clarify that if we’re talking about whole numbers then my understanding is that the set of all whole numbers is the same “size” as the set of all odd numbers. The quick and dirty way to think about it is you could theoretically make a list of all the odd numbers and all the whole numbers and assign each whole number to an odd number at a 1-1 ratio

            The reason the set of all numbers is “bigger” is because of things like fractions and irrational numbers. Try assigning an odd number to every decimal. You can’t even make a list of all the decimals. There is no non-zero interval between which a finite amount of decimals exist.