0

The real world is the totality of all objects existing in it. i.e. every object that exists in the real world is a PART of the real world.

An infinite is defined as having a part of it that doesn't have a beginning in the real world.

  1. For whatever beings to exist in the real world, there must exist (in the real world) something that existed (in the real world) before it, that caused it to begin existence in the real world.

  2. If every cause of a beginning in the real world, must itself have a beginning in the real world.

Then this leads to

  1. an infinite set of objects existing in the real world, thus the real world is infinite!

If there is no infinite set of objects in the real world [call this sentence K], and if we hold 1, then:

4.there must be a beginner in the real world, that doesn't have a beginning in the real world, thus the real world is infinite!

To reject that, we need to falsify 1. That is, there can exist objects in the real world that have a spontaneous beginning, i.e. no object before them existed in the real world that caused their beginning of existence in the real world. But this is like saying that: a thing can come from nothing. This way the real world can be a finite realm that originated from nothing. Which is absurd! Because nothing cannot give rise to something, since it's nothing.

So the real world must be infinite!

/Argument finished.

Although I made up this argument, this argument must have been proposed a long time ago.

Questions:

Had this argument, or an argument similar to it been advanced before? what's its name?

There must have been a investigation as to whether the real world is finite or not, what's the relevance of the above argument to that investigation?

closed as off-topic by Eliran, Bread, Mark Andrews, Conifold, virmaior Apr 1 at 13:39

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions that push a personal philosophy with no question beyond "am I right" or "what do you think" are off-topic here as this is not a blog. It's ok to express unique opinions, but you must have an actual, answerable question to go with them." – Eliran, Bread, Conifold, virmaior
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

2

In your question you reject a possibility on the grounds that it is absurd:

But this is like saying that: a thing can come from nothing. This way the real world can be a finite realm that originated from Nothing. Which is absurd!

However, that reality is absurd is a possibility that you should consider. If you allow reality to be infinite, which is a concept that we cannot comprehend anyway, then why reject the possibility that it not finite or infinite but rather absurd?

It is absurd not in the sense of being funny, or silly, but in the sense of being ultimately incomprehensible and inherently paradoxical.

Many people in general, scientists, and philosophers in particular, strongly believe that the universe must be ultimately comprehensible and that it conforms to logic (i.e. cannot be absurd). I find that quite silly.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.