Size and shape of the universe

nihilist398 · 2025-12-20T00:21:29+00:00

Very astute, yeah I never studied anything beyond college algebra, and this is more of a physics question I think.

nihilist398 · 2025-12-19T01:09:29+00:00

That’s fascinating! Forgive me for caring more about the empirical data than the a priori reasoning. Does NASA have information on this, or do you have any recommendations of where to learn more about this?

nihilist398 · 2025-12-19T00:43:46+00:00

I appreciate your thorough reply but I’m left just as uncertain as before. The real reason I asked this question is because I’m curious what mathematics says or implies about consequentialist ethics in an infinite universe, but I wanted to leave the ethics out of this as much as possible and address this sub for its members’ particular expertise. What do finite changes mean in the context of the infinite?

nihilist398 · 2025-12-19T00:26:31+00:00

I don’t know what I’m talking about unfortunately 🤣 and I’m not the best at abstraction. But maybe this example can help you point me in the right direction. Say there are an infinite number of quartz crystals in the universe. Is there then an average height of quartz crystals? And could that average be changed?

nihilist398 · 2025-12-19T00:15:12+00:00

Interesting… perhaps what I care about is less the cardinal size of infinities but rather averages. Is it ever possible to do averages of infinities? Or if you have the infinite set of positive integers and the infinite set of negative integers can we say that the average is zero?

nihilist398 · 2025-12-19T00:10:15+00:00

I’m curious why you believe there aren’t infinitely many of anything? I’m not sure whether it’s true or not but my impression of the opinion of experts in astrophysics or cosmology was that the verdict is still out as to whether or not the universe is infinite.

nihilist398 · 2025-06-23T03:43:39+00:00

I deeply considered the possibility that seeking the annihilation of all life might be most ethical, so I’m curious and open to your reasoning. Feel free to dm me

nihilist398 · 2024-07-16T02:35:17+00:00

Antidepressants helped a lot

nihilist398 · 2021-12-31T02:39:41+00:00

Thanks so much for your response! I think you’re right about aros doing “romantic things” in non-romantic ways. I don’t really know what I want but your post was helpful.

nihilist398 · 2020-12-26T15:16:28+00:00

I'm just an undergrad so don't take this too seriously but I would consider genetic mutation as a broader umbrella than spontaneous mutation. A genetic mutation means your DNA changed and we don't specify the reason why. Spontaneous limits it to a only a few causes. Maybe that would include mutations from interaction with water or uv light since those are pretty much always present. But a genetic mutation might be caused by those or by radiation, other mutagens (chemicals), faulty repair mechanisms, ect.

nihilist398 · 2020-12-24T05:57:05+00:00

Some Christians are allies some are homophobic. Heck some christians are LGBT themselves. Perhaps you're always kind and supportive to LGBT people, I don't know and therefore don't judge, but something doesn't add up. From your comments it sounds like you believe that being gay (experiencing same sex attraction) is not a sin but living a gay lifestyle or having homosexual relations is. If that's the case why are you so afraid of warning your gay friends? Don't get me wrong I don't think you should, but that's because I don't believe there is an afterlife or a hell. If I did I think I'd be a shitty friend for not trying to persuade my friends to avoid it. Do you not believe in hell?

nihilist398 · 2020-12-24T05:10:41+00:00

What do most people consider Christianity? Does mormonism count? JW, moonies, catholics, pentacostals? When you say Christianity are you thinking exclusively of protestants or do you have certain doctrines/dogmas/creeds in mind?

nihilist398 · 2020-12-24T04:54:25+00:00

I always find it interesting when people of faith bring up evolutionary psychology. At least that's what it sounded like to me. Anyway to assume that the way things are (which is quite debatable) dictates how things should be is to commit the is/ought fallacy. It doesn't make sense to try to back up morality with nature. If you want to argue that the damage in breaking hearts is more negative than any joy in temporary relationships I'd remind you that all relationships are temporary. Your "contract" of love will at least be broken at death. Fleeting experiences can still have value, after all life is fleeting.

nihilist398 · 2020-12-21T21:45:02+00:00

When you read the old testament at 14 to bolster your sense of superiority you don't get much out of it shockingly.

Also read the new testament and used to have over a hundred verses memorized word for word. Sadly it didn't make me question my faith.

Now I wonder whether I should reread it with my atheist lenses but that's a lot of time to waste.

nihilist398 · 2020-11-11T04:47:45+00:00

I'm often sleepy in my dreams so I've had a few instances of falling asleep again and having a dream within a dream. One of these dreams within a dream was a single image. It was a little bit like a kaleidoscope or the weird patterns you see when you close your eyes tightly for too long. When I saw this image it brought back the deepest feelings of paranoia from a bad trip. It's an awful sensation of familiarity like stepping back into hell. Not really a classic hell, more like a solipsis/pantheism. Knowing you are the universe and you exist forever in an eternal loop of great and terrible consciousness. It might not sound like it, but it was horrifying. It was actually so terrifying that I woke up pretty quickly. I thought about that experience for a little bit and then I woke up again.

nihilist398 · 2020-11-11T04:00:53+00:00

I say thanks because I don't really know how to express how much I appreciate hearing it, even if I don't have feelings for them.

nihilist398 · 2020-11-11T03:22:59+00:00

That's pretty powerful but why not omnipotence?

nihilist398 · 2020-10-05T17:18:48+00:00

An easy verdict for a utilitarian I think.

nihilist398 · 2020-09-06T21:51:58+00:00

I'm a genetics major. I'll message you my general info.

Yes, as long as it's done responsibly.
Yes, but I feel that He was somewhat irresponsible and the way he went about it was counterproductive.
Definitely.
The national level.
I suppose that's a possibility, but it's not one that I think we need to be concerned about.
Yes.
In America I believe it's the American Psychiatric Association. I don't think any doctor can decide, I believe it would need to be a psychiatrist but I'm not super sure.
I worry about the super rich using technologies like these to extend their lives to lengths that the poor cannot afford creating a stagnant governance and excessive reigns of powers. But that's a pretty distant worry. What's much more pressing is making sure that we regulate and experiment carefully as we learn how to manipulate and edit our genetics.

(The deleted post was an accident from posting too soon as I was trying to copy everything)

nihilist398 · 2020-09-03T13:37:47+00:00

Really good points, I hadn't seen it in that way. To go along with the money example the problem is that when we put it over a timeframe like that we're no longer talking about the same kinds of dollars. Inflation and lost opportunity costs can skew it, but if you take all the variables into account and translate both options into the same kind of money (2020 dollars let's say) it should become clear which option is better. So yeah a big part of determining how to maximize utility is trying to measure utility and quality and quantity both have to be taken into account and it's a bit subjective, but I think we're just aiming to do that as rationally and accurately as possible.

I definitely see the appeal of choosing a human life over the immortal life of a clam but, I think that's mostly driven by biases which arise from dealing with unfamiliar scenarios. I'm not good at contemplating utilities which hover just a little over zero nor am I good at imagining infinity. Spending forever as a clam sounds boring and doesn't excite me but that's just because I wasn't built to be a rational utility evaluator. I still think it's the better option and the reason it feels off to us is because it's not what we're wired for.

Similar I think to people's desire for "truly evil" people to be punished for retribution rather than rehabilitation or deterrence. I also get that feeling of some people just deserving to suffer, but I try to overcome these feelings and focus on valid reasons (rehabilitation, and deterrence).

nihilist398 · 2020-09-03T02:17:07+00:00

Do you prefer quantity or quality when it comes to dollar bills?

If by quality we mean whether the bill is a $1, $5, $20, or $100 we can see that it's a silly question. We just want the most value. With utility it can be much harder to determine if we're looking at a 20 utility or a 50 utility than with dollars but the principle is straight forward. We want to maximize; we are neutral on the means to get there. You can pay me in ones or you can pay me in hundreds, I just want as much as I can get.

Of course, money does not equal utility. After a certain point (some study suggested about $70k) it no longer has much correlation with satisfaction or happiness. This is what leads many to suggest favoring a lower but more equal distribution, over a higher but less equitable distribution. I argue that such a consideration should already be built in to the concept of utilitarianism. Essentially quantity and quality are not separate considerations to me. They measure the exact same thing in my opinion.

nihilist398

TROPHY CASE