The Trivialization
What is infinity?
Mathematics scholars never ask themselves this; mathematics is symbolic, manipulating a universe of formal hypothetical simulation, where on one side of the equals sign everything is resolved when the other side of the equality forms a perfect identity.
I wish that in the real world it were always like this without the quality of the algebraic hypothesis of an equality: one equals one. A car of the same make, year, model, and price as another of identical content. It is not easy to perceive the trickery, the artifice; one is not equal to one according to the law of dialectics, nor in the law of non-fungible things; a stolen cell phone of identical value and model cannot be replaced by another of the same model and value, its life is in the information of the stolen cell phone, which was formatted according to its sensitivity.
An airline knows that one passenger is not equivalent to or interchangeable with another. It's easy for the aircraft to understand that, first and foremost, the passenger's weight is fundamental, and height, in a small aircraft, is an extremely sensitive variable when the aircraft's weight is a determining factor. So, where does mathematical equality universally apply? Why was this supposed equality invented?
When we talk about a billion units, we think that no one, no human being, has managed to count from one to a billion; it would take more than a lifetime to do so.
If you put the highest denomination bills into a machine to count them, it would spend a week counting a billion bills without stopping.
So what is infinity?
For all intents and purposes, a quantity to be infinite would easily be a billion or a trillion.
The ancient Egyptians didn't have a numeral symbol for a million! It was too large a quantity to even consider that anything in the universe could reach the number one million.
So, Astronomy plays with quantities of billions upon billions as if it were talking about things that are humanly measurable. It could stop at a trillion, which is a light-year, but the arrogance and insanity of astronomers are not content with this limit and they invented the immeasurable infinity.
The practical infinity is a trillion. Anything that surpasses it has no meaning for human beings.
Two and a half million light-years separate us from Andromeda, the galaxy closest to us! They are bluffing, they are mocking our sanity.
One hundred thousand light-years, maybe two hundred, is the size of our galaxy! That faint little star in the sky is Mars, called a planet, no matter the category, so it takes us at least nine months to get there, when it is closest to Earth, that discreet and almost imperceptible little light.
Have we lost our sense of Arithmetic?
The total amount of printed dollar bills has never exceeded one and a half trillion dollars; the rest is recorded, which is why billionaires will never be able to sit on the bills representing their fortunes. It would be impossible to count, transport, and physically spend all that money; it would cause any bank to collapse.
Astronomical amounts is a metaphorical adjective for things above one trillion dollars.
Astronomy has trivialized arithmetic. How can they be so certain about what happened 14.8 billion years ago in the universe? You can't calculate every step of such an immense period. Phenomena here on Earth, like the 3,000-year Egyptian Empire, the 800-year Roman Empire, and the 988-year Middle Ages, are our most extensively documented historical experiences. It seems infinite. Generations were born and died in the Middle Ages without knowing they were in the Middle Ages, without knowing what existed before and outside of the Middle Ages. Our lives are between fifty and one hundred years at the limit, so numbers are completely useless, like the first galaxies estimated to have formed "only 200 million years after the Big Bang." It seems insignificant, laughable. We are irresponsibly playing at arithmetic.
Nothing that happened a billion years ago in the universe, or even just a million years ago, can be evaluated and experienced within our human conception. We need to tone down the arrogance of Astronomy and start understanding what the speed of light is, which is very insignificant compared to the dimensions of our galaxy, and undo this feeling of minimizing our solar system as if it were our backyard. These are gigantic things that we have learned to ignore and underestimate, like the planet Jupiter, capable of containing 1,300 Earths, or the sun, capable of containing ten thousand Jupiter-sized planets. We are playing with immeasurable apocalyptic dimensions, and because of our arrogance, we no longer even think about the Earth we live on, which is so large that it still takes us 50 hours of flight to circle the Earth and ninety minutes for the space station to complete its orbit.
Forget infinity. Infinity is sufficiently thought of as the magnitude of trillions; more than that, our brain cannot grasp and understand. Everything else is arrogant pretension, pride, and astronomical mathematical delirium!
The major error of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) and its twin, the Hubble Space Telescope, is that, incredibly, the astronomers, astrophysicists, and mathematicians at the observatories forgot to relativize the distance measurements captured in the mirrors reflecting light or rays from the distant past of galaxies. This lack of consideration stems from the galaxies' displacement and the observer's position within the telescope. They must also consider the relative speed between the observed object, which is 14 billion light-years in the past, and its current position when the light emitted 14 billion years ago entered the telescope. This displacement error would increase the currently calculated date and distance of the observation by at least thirty times.
It's like trying to measure the distance between a standing person and a speeding car instantly, except that in this case, the telescope's position has varied astronomically over the 14 billion years since the light left the stellar object and reached the telescope's optical surfaces today.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário