How does science view absolutes such as infinity, eternity, perfection. My logic tells me absolutes cannot exist.
You mean like the speed of light and absolute zero? Science is okay with them. I’m not sure that science in general has any particular stance on infinity, eternity and perfection, though mathematics in particular just slaps a symbol on them (well, the first one, anyway) and carries on.
Well, my logic tells me that “Absolutes cannot exist” is a self-refuting statement. 
That one of my favorite jokes.
Why are “infinity” and “eternity” absolutes any more than “4” or “10 hours” are absolutes?
And “perfection” lies int he realm of esthetics or philosophy, not science.
Because scientists generally are aware of the precision of the value; “4” hours means 3 hours 31 minutes to 4 hours 29 minutes, 4.0 hours means 3 hours 57 minutes to 4 hours 3 minutes. There is no indication of precision in “infinity” or “eternity”.
“Perfect” does have a mathematical meaning, but I can’t speak to that.
How about Ijust make that infinity and eternity and skip everything else. I screwed that one up!
But scientists often use precise values of non-infinite numbers. If I say that F = GMm/r^2, the “2” means precisely 2. And if I Planck units, then c = 1.
Yes, but values like “4 hours” are seldom constants; they are usually measured or estimated values.
And there different types of infinities.
However, infinity is more in the realm of mathematics than in physics. We generally assume that physical quantity can’t have an infinite value. Eternity is just infinity in units of time.
badger, don’t you believe in God?
You can’t get anymore absolute than believing that everything in the universe was created by a single sentient entity that exists beyond the realm of space and time, and also knows the color of your underwear.
I do believe in a supreme being. Not sure what his role is. Not even sure if he is a physical being. My intuition makes me think he or she is likely physical but in a demension larger than what we can identify. Similar to the way we imprint codes on DNA I feel he may have imprinted some kind of planetary DNA on the universe (laymens term)
Yup, we kinda assume at this point that there is neither infinite time nor space. Therefore, nothing is infinite. Nothing we can identify, anyway.
But the discussion is about absolutes, not specifically about the immeasurable, isn’t it?
Is defined the same as absolute?
Didn’t read the OP then? :dubious:
Ahem.
At least in some senses infinity must exist. Much of the math which goes into making your GPS work is based upon infinitesimals, for instance, and certainly GPS actually works as expected.
Whether you could start flying out beyond the edge of the universe for an infinite distance, who knows. Ultimately, your belief in whether one could or not has no bearing on whether one could or not, just like people who have faith that they can safely drive while drunk is quickly rendered moot the instant they run over a child. In all cases, reality trumps expectations.
Is it even possible for a human to have a concept of nothing? I just tried to develop a concept and all I can imagine is something ripping anything that enters into the smallest possible particles and then sending it carreening toward the edge, but that is still not nothingness.
Y’know, even if you can find some philosophical blind spot in science, that doesn’t mean God automatically takes its place.
That’s just a psychological limitation. We (most of us) can’t conceive of “silence” either; most of us have never actually heard true silence. There’s always the pulse of blood rushing through our ears…
It’s easy to have a concept of nothing. I had a candy bar, and ate it. Now what have I got? Nothing. How many unicorns are there? None. (Unless you credit the Living Unicorn Project…) Okay, how many eight-legged elephants are there?
The empty set is remarkably easy to define and to envision.