Seems like for physics infinities could be a bust in the math?

Lets ASSUME for sake of argument the universe is finite. The universe has a finite distance in size. Call it an absurdly large number M (for max).

In math currently, the limit of 1/x as x goes to zero from positive side is infinity.Q: for the sake of doing physics, Does that answer make sense in a finite universe? Shouldn't the limit of 1/x as x goes to zero from positive side be M (the max size of the universe, or some arbitrary large #)?

It seems like all these infinities in the math may be distorting physics? If an arbitrary large # M was plugged in instead of these infinities could that solve some problems?

That is exactly the kind of response my daughter thought this post deserved! Very funny!

Ok any real responses or thoughts? Could there be a bust in using a math that abounds in infinities to describe a physical world which doesn't have any?

From quick Google AI responses, it sounds like with a finitist view, calculus changes a good bit.

Anther question: does it make sense to integrate infinitesimally small slices, when in reality sizes smaller than the Planck length may not make sense?

I agree that math with infinities and infinitesimally small slices is more elegant, but maybe it isn't accurate for the real world?

Seems like infinities and infinitesimals have been a significant point of consideration from the the Greeks and ancient math on. I still don't see an explicit explanation of how using math based on infinities and infinitesimals works to describe a finite universe, but I'm guessing that has been considered. Would be curious for any explanation or link to a discussion of that answer.

It's the staircase paradox. It's unsolvable.

Nobody here is smart enough to respond.

I have no idea what language you are even posting in.

So I wonder if calculus Needs to be quantized?
Does it make sense to be integrating with infinitesimals when in reality things are quantized?
Using infinitesimals and infinities is more elegant. we didn't know the wold was quantum when calculus was developed. Maybe it needs to be reworked?

AND - Does the concept of infinite superpositions make sense? How do we really measure that experimentally? Maybe the number of superpositions is extremely high, more than we can count, but not infinite?

Last time I took mushrooms I ended up in a SQRT(-i) number system and spent a few days in L'Hopital

Burdizzo said:

---

Last time I took mushrooms I ended up in a SQRT(-i) number system and spent a few days in L'Hopital

---

JDL 96 said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

Last time I took mushrooms I ended up in a SQRT(-i) number system and spent a few days in L'Hopital

---

---

Theoretically there is no limit to how small x can be...ie....you can always divide x by 2 and never reach absolute zero. That being said...if there is no limit to how small x can be then there is no limit to how large 1/x can be...hence 1/x cannot be finite and must be infinite.

Quote:

---

That being said...if there is no limit to how small x can be then there is no limit to how large 1/x can be...hence 1/x cannot be finite and must be infinite

---

In a mathematical sense, yes. But in a physical sense does this infinity make sense? AND - in a physical sense - there IS a limit on how small x can be. It can't be smaller than the Planck length.
For doing physics, does it make sense to quantize x at the Planck length? And/ or change the limit from infinity to some arbitrary large maximum number M. ?

Any quick thoughts on this from any science or math people?