On Monday, January 13, 2020 at 5:10:07 AM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 1:18 AM Alan Grayson <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > *> My hunch, and that's all it is, is that "the substratum" from which the >> BB emerged, is infinitely old, and the concept of spatial extent probably >> doesn't apply to it. There could be many BB's, possibly an infinite number, >> but all finite in spatial extent if they had beginnings. AG* > > > If, as this one does, all the Big Bang's have a finite number of particles > and are all of finite spatial extent then there is only a finite number of > ways those particles can be arranged. But if there are a infinite number > of those Big Bang's then in one of them (actually in a infinite number of > them) there must be an arrangement of particles that are identical to you > in every way except he spells his last name "Greyson" not "Grayson". So I > guess both Mr. Greyson and Mr. Grayson have changed their minds and now > believe in the existence of the Multiverse. > > John K Clark >
*I think you're making the assumption that the possible arrangement of a finite set of particles of finite extent corresponds to a countable set. But if space is continuous, that assumption fails, and with it your entire thesis. There is only ONE Grayson, thankfully. AG* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/57eb9040-6a70-4d42-b3db-51cefd16c24c%40googlegroups.com.
