Boundless Roundness (Infinite Loop)

TheMadFool

I was just mulling over something we learn in high school - the now intriguing mathematical relationship betweeen green plants and animals. Every schoolboy knows ( :grin: ) plants and animals are existentially dependent on each other. How? Animals (even plants too by the way but do ignore this point for the moment) respire which involves oxygen consumption and release of carbondioxide using lungs/gills. Green plants photsynthesize by consuming the carbondioxide and releasing oxygen. The marriage between plants and animals is a match made in heaven - perfectly self-sustaining (ignore solar energy).

The oxygen & carbondioxide levels are maintained at optimum levels by the partnership between animals & green plants. The mathematical side to this story is that, in a sense, oxygen and carbondioxide are limitless (both being continually replenished by a cyclical (round/circle) process) i.e. oxygen and carbondioxide are infinite for all intents and purposes!

Conclusion: Phenomena that are cyclical in nature and self-sustaining for that reason are indistinguishable from (actual) infinity.

This principle will come in handy as a template for all human activities. Recycling! :chin:

How to make finite resources virtually infinite? Recycle!

Metaphysician Undercover

↪TheMadFool

Actually I think carbon dioxide was first, and more natural to the planet. It took many years of plant forms producing O2 through photosynthesis before there was sufficient free oxygen for the ozone layer, and higher life forms.

So I don't think your depiction of a cyclical dependence is very accurate.

TheMadFool

Actually I think carbon dioxide was first, and more natural to the planet. It took many years of plant forms producing O2 through photosynthesis before there was sufficient free oxygen for the ozone layer, and higher life forms. — Metaphysician Undercover

I had an inkling of that but I'm not sure how CO2 can form without O2 coming first? :chin: Interesting nonetheless.

So I don't think your depiction of a cyclical dependence is very accurate — Metaphysician Undercover

I had to ignore some truths like the earth not being a closed system, the "invisible" hand being our dear ol' sun but the all-important point I was trying to make was a cyclical process with each component of that process rejuvenating the other could be the answer to many of our problems. If nature can do it, there must be a way to do it. If there's a way to do it, humans can learn it. If humans can learn it, humans can do it. If humans can do it... :chin:

Nils Loc

Phenomena that are cyclical in nature and self-sustaining for that reason are indistinguishable from (actual) infinity. — TheMadFool

You just wanted to use the word infinity here for dramatic flare. Phenomena that are cyclical and self-sustaining are just that.

We've got a little plastic sterling engine(?) snowman in the window sill, who moves his hands all day long if he is exposed to enough light. Put it somewhere where it's always exposed to enough light and there is gaseous temperature gradient as a means for cycling the mechanism it would never stop... until a dog got a hold of it, or some other environmental change, or the wearing of friction.

The dog eating the sterling engine is sort of like the Sun absorbing the Earth. Just have to wait.

TheMadFool

You just wanted to use the word infinity here for dramatic flare. Phenomena that are cyclical and self-sustaining are just that.

We've got a little plastic sterling engine(?) snowman in the window sill, who moves his hands all day long if he is exposed to enough light. Put it somewhere where it's always exposed to enough light and there is gaseous temperature gradient as a means for cycling the mechanism it would never stop... until a dog got a hold of it, or some other environmental change, or the wearing of friction.

The dog eating the sterling engine is sort of like the Sun absorbing the Earth. Just have to wait. — Nils Loc

:up: I was just wondering about so-called perpetual motion machines. People, including the best of scientists, seem obsessed about actual perpetual motion machines and since such machines are impossible on pain of violating the laws of nature, they (scientists) have given up in utter frustration.

Why don't we lower the bar a little and simply use solar energy to drive such pseudo-perpetual motion machines. Since it's believed that the sun will last another coupla billion years, we can for the moment consider it an infinite source of (solar) energy, no?

You know what I mean, right? If an particular machine generates its own energy and uses that energy to drive itself, it's indistinguishable from a machine that gets its energy from a virtually infinite source of energy ( "perpetual").

Boundless Roundness (Infinite Loop)

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions