Originally Posted by
MorpheusSandman
There is a reason we tend to believe that if theoretical math works out on paper, it may have its representative in reality as well; the reason being that math has proved so immensely valuable for modeling that reality so far. The fact that infinity works on paper is, itself, a good argument that it may have some basis in actual, practical reality.
I'm not sure if you got my point... Hilbert's Hotel and the M&M examples are ways in which to imagine infinity by finite successions of things, which makes more sense if the A Theory of time is true, because then time is linear progression/succession of moments. But consider for a moment that B Theory is true and all time is omnipresent and we're merely observing it from one point and the illusion of time is merely a reflection of our limited epistemology. In that scenario, infinity becomes the totality of everything. In fact, there are no finite things, and everything we imagine as finite is just us drawing outlines in a circle. I always thought that would make sense of, eg, Godel's Incompleteness Theorems, because the natural numbers are, by their nature, treating reality as if it were finite. The limitations of treating the infinite as finite, as we observe the outline of things, would naturally lead to incompleteness.