Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:36:50.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Problem of Infinite Matter in Steady-State Cosmology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Richard Schlegel
Richard Schlegel*
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The creation-of-matter hypothesis of the Bondi-Gold-Hoyle steady-state cosmology requires that in an infinite time to which the first transfinite number may be assigned the number of atoms of matter produced would be equal to the cardinal number of the set of mathematical points in the continuum. The existence of a set of finite atoms with that cardinal number is physically unacceptable. The argument for the production of a non-denumerable set of atoms, in infinite time, is given in terms of a model which is shown to be isomorphic with the original Cantor “diagonal” proof for the existence of a non-denumerable infinity. An alternative model which meets the requirements of the steady-state theory is presented; in this model, the number of atoms is explicitly no greater than countably infinite, and remains countably infinite as long as the past time of the universe is restricted to the unlimited set of finite unit-time intervals. If the origin of the steady-state universe is taken as being within that infinite set, expressed by the negative natural numbers, the contradiction of an atom at every mathematical point does not arise. The contradiction does arise if the origin is not within the set of finite numbers, and accordingly there is a restriction as to which concept of infinite past may properly be maintained in the steady-state theory.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , January 1965 , pp. 21 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Bondi, H. and Gold, T., Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 108, 252 (1948).Google Scholar
[2] Bondi, H., Cosmology, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1952, p. 141.Google Scholar
[3] Fraenkel, A. A., Abstract Set Theory, North-Holland Pub. Co, Amsterdam, 1961.Google Scholar
[4] Hoyle, F., Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 108, 372 (1948).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Hoyle, F. and Narlikar, J. V., Proc. Roy. Soc., A 270, 334 (1962).Google Scholar
[6] Hoyle, F. and Narlikar, J. V., Proc. Roy. Soc., A 273, 1 (1963).Google Scholar
[7] Kant, Immanuel, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. N. K. Smith, Macmillan, London, 1933, p. 397.Google Scholar
[8] Kemp, R. R. D., Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 60, 176 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] McKeon, R. P., Selections from Medieval Philosophers, v. II, Scribner's, New York, 1930, pp. 149–150.Google Scholar
[10] Russell, B., Principles of Mathematics, 2nd. ed., W. W. Norton, New York, 1938.Google Scholar
[11] Schlegel, R., Nature, 193, 665 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Schlegel, R., Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., 8, 18 (1963).Google Scholar
[13] Sierpinski, W., Leçons sur les Nombres Transfinis, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1928.Google Scholar
[14] Ursell, H. D. and Schlegel, R., Nature, 196, 1015 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Whitrow, G. J., The Natural Philosophy of Time, Nelson, London, 1961, p. 32.Google Scholar
[16] Wilder, R. W., Introduction to the Foundations of Mathematics, Wiley & Sons, New York, 1952.Google Scholar