I'm not sure how to respond to this. I offered to discuss mathematical infinity. You have a personal theory, which is fine; but your theory makes up terms without defining them and doesn't make much sense to me. This forum has a Personal Theories section, which is where personal theories go. I see no discussion of mathematical infinity here.

I'll offer some specific comments here, but if you desire to learn about mathematical infinity you should start with the links I gave earlier. Else there's no place to go with this.

I don't recall saying anything like that. In any event, in the transfinite ordinals, adding to an infinite ordinal sometimes gives you a new one. You should add this to your reading list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_numberI have no problem with this in theory. I don't think you've presented much of an alternative.

I have three separate problems here.

* Basics of what? Certainly not the basics of the mathematical theory of infinity. Rather, the basics of your own personal theory. In which case this thread goes in Personal Theories.

* You are confusing boundedness with cardinality. There are infinitely many real numbers between 0 and 1, but they form a bounded set. You can draw a finite circle around them. In fact a circle contains finite area, goes in every possible direction, yet contains infinitely many points.

* You can certainly add to a "directional" infinity as you call it. Consider the counting numbers 0, 1, 2, 3, ... Now just rearrange them in this new order: 1, 2, 3, ..., 0. The second order represents a different ordinal number than the first. You can see that because there's an order-preserving bijection between 0, 1, 2, ... and 1, 2, 3, ...; but in the second case we have 0 left over at the end. We DID just add an element at the unbounded end of an infinite set. Ordinals are really cool, it's too bad people don't hear about them much.

I don't know what that means. I think you're confusing boundedness with cardinality, or with order, or with something.

Evidence? Examples? What about the infinite set of points between 0 and 1? What about a circle in the plane?

You'll need to offer a formal definition else you're making word salad. "Direction of infinity?" That's not defined by you at all.

If you have vague ideas in your head, you can read Wiki and ask questions online to help clarify your ideas. There's little point in doubling down on your own confusions.

scientificphilosophe » April 13th, 2017, 6:02 am wrote:You can have a 'forwards' form of infinity from a start point, or a 'negative' direction from an end point. By limiting infinity in other parameters it may be squeezed into a channel with a flow in one or mire directions.

Squeezed into a channel with a flow? Does this word salad come with croutons?

scientificphilosophe » April 13th, 2017, 6:02 am wrote:It doesn't matter whether you add different 'dimensions' (new directions) in which to seek a new level of infinity, or close down more directions from an infinite set of directions, the basics don't change. Infinity can only exist without an end in the direction of travel.

You're just making stuff up. No law against it, but you're not giving me anything sensible to work with.

If 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ... isn't infinite, I don't know what is. I already showed how to add something to the unbounded end.

When the bowling ball distorts the rubber sheet, what pulls the bowling ball down? Meta-gravity? No, it's that the rubber sheet model is a fable, a simplified popularization. Same with the Hilbert hotel.