: : Your reasoning is correct, but you are using the wrong object. : : You assume that the univers has a " border", and from that you derive : : it can't be infinit. So actually you are saying: "Any object with "borders/limits" : : isn't infinit. I do agree that this must be true. : : What I am missing is how this apply to the universe. : : Where is the proof that the Universe ends somewhere?

: : I'm not convinced about the Bang/Shrink theory. : : It implies that there allways was something, and allways will be something. : : But if that is true, why has that something be a cycle of Bangs and Shrinks and not : : the universe as is? : : Futhermore, Banging and Shrinking isn't possible in an infinit universe.

: I am very sure that "Banging and Shrinking" is possibe, and : that space is finite (please read my 5D Spacetime post : for more details about this).

: What you are saying is that Big Bang never occured, yet : it's a most accepted theory among the scientists.

The truth is NOT a matter of voting, and see which theory get 50% plus 1.

: It all comes to this: : Big Bang occured => the universe is finite : Big Bang never occured => the universe is infinite.

If Big Bang occurd => universe is infinit else inconclusive

: Infinity is just a theoretical assumption used for : algebra and Euclidean geometry, and I belive : that nothing in reality is infinite.

Believe: Science=Religion? (note: You are saying that Science is using methods which describe things that in reality doesn't exist. Therefor science doesn't describe reality?)

: Now you may say: what about time. Time exists only : with space, therefore it's finite too.

Thus even the Banging and Shrinking cycle is finit? If it is, when and how did it start and when and how will it stop?

: Tomislav

• Re: Big Shink, Re:Re:Endless, but not infinite - Tomislav_Strelar/">Tomislav Strelar - September 30, 1998 - 12:31 UTC