Colin Sanders ENGL 1102 InfinityAs Endless as we Think?

The idea of infinity is an intriguing one: can such a small symbol adequately handle such a colossal concept? Many philosophers over the centuries, such as John Locke, believed that humans could not have any sufficient idea of what infinity is (Wikipedia). With this challenge, there came challengers; one of the subtlest of these men is Jorge Luis Borges. Borges thought that the infinity could indeed be pursued, and the most notable of his writings on the subject is The Library of Babel. In it, he fabricates a universe that is all books; in it, he makes a startling conjecture. I will be bold enough to suggest this solutio n to the ancient problem: The Library is unlimited but periodic (Borges). I believe that this is Borges central claim: the universe, our universe, cannot be truly infinite. If any philosopher had been asked for a definition of infinity, he might have produced some unintelligible rigmarole, but he would certainly not have been able to give a definition that had any meaning at all. -Bertrand Russell, British philosopher Infinity is a puzzle of the ages, dating back to Zenos paradoxes in 400 B.C. (Wikipedia). At the center of all applications in mathematics and science is the question Russell describes so well: what is infinity? It wasnt until the late 19 th century that mathematician Georg Cantor gave infinity a reasonable definition and pioneered the field of study we now call set theory. However, philosophers and scientists today still disagree as to whether or not there can be multiple infinities, whether or not infinity can be conceived of, and whether or not infinity even exists. Within Borges short story is an idea that (if uncontested) gives a keen insight into the nature of infinity; but before one can follow his argument and its implications, one must look into the mathematical perspectives of some of the most renowned mathematicians of the centuries. Georg Cantors field of mathematics dealt with sets of numbers. For example, one can imagine the set of all positive integers, that is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 continuing on forever. This set contains infinitely many numbers; that is, no matter how high you count, there is always the next integer to be counted. In this way of thinking, it is easy to imagine infinity to mean a number so high that is uncountable. However, in the 17th century Galileo realized a problem with this definition. Call the previous set of numbers S, and now recognize a new set of numbers T as the positive odd integers, e.g. 1, 3, 5, 7. If we were to count the number of integers in both sets simultaneously, we would be able to count two integers in S for every single integer in T; common sense suggests that T has half as many numbers in it as S does. T is smaller than S because S contains both T and all even integers. This is the paradox Galileo realized with the definition of infinity as a specific, uncountable number: one infinity can be smaller or larger than another infinity (Graham, Kantor). From his thoughts, Galileo concluded that infinity could not have a definition as a number. How could a number be greater than or less than itself? Georg Cantor resolved this paradox by simply acknowledging that there were multiple infinities. However, All infinities are uncountable, but some are smaller than others another mathematician in the 19th century, Paul du Bois-Reymond,

reacted to Cantors ideas by critiquing Cantor for not making any distinction among sets (Graham, Kantor). Now, if we observe set S (all positive integers) and set T (all positive odd integers), the fundamental distinction that du Bois-Reymond sought is this: the difference between S and T is the unit that approaches infinity. That is, S increases to an infinity by 1 (1, 2, 3, 4), while T increases to a different infinity by 2 (1, 3, 5, 7). So rather than define infinity as a specific number, we can define it as an indefinite article, such as the word some. If I have some pencils and some pens, you cannot tell whether I have more pens or more pencils, although either is a possibility. Now, if I have an infinite number of pens, and an infinite number of pencils, our definition suggests that I dont necessarily have the same number of pens and pencils. An even better analogy to our definition is the contrast between weight and quantity. If I have 5 pounds of one object and 5 pounds of another, I dont necessarily have the same number of each object. As soon as I know that one group is feathers and one group is apples, I am certain that I have many more feathers than apples. Similarly, before I know what I have an infinite number of, there is no way to know which infinity is larger. The distinction, again, is the single unit being counted in each casethat is, apples and feathers.

Now, in direct contradiction of Mr. Russell, I will attempt a definition of infinity: Infinity (n) an uncountable and very great amount of something, defined uniquely by that particular something Furthermore, I will now proceed to extract what meaning I can from this tentative definition. It is one thing to define a word, and another to make its definition useful. As it turns out, it is Jorge Luis Borges who finds the meaning in such a definition. Returning to the discussion of Borges short story, we can actually find quite a few units to reference in defining the infinity that is the Library. Each wall of each h exagon is furnished with five bookshelves; each bookshelf holds thirty-two books identical in format; each book contains four hundred ten pages; each page, forty lines; each line, approximately eighty black letters. Also, there are twenty-five unique letters in Borges Library. If we imagine that the Library is an infinite number of these letters, it is easy to recognize that we must eventually repeat letters, and eventually repeat pairs of letters, and eventually repeat triplets of letters, and then words. With an infinite Library, and a finite number of letters, we would eventually find a repeated line, a repeated page, an entire repeated book. But imagine the largest unit possible: the group of hexagonal rooms that contain all possible combinations of books. Still the Library is infinite, so there must be more. In order to achieve infinity, we must repeat this unit as if it were an apple until we have an infinite number of apples. This is where Borges had his moment of insight: this particular infinity is endless, but periodic. It repeats; it is predictable; it is what he himself calls the Order (Borges). I think Borges had no intention of constraining this idea to a fictional story. I think that he had his insight with relation to our universe. In thinking about the concept of infinity,

Borges likely wondered to himself whether we exist in an infinite amount of space, and then asked what that infinite space would be like. Assuming that space is infinite, Borges chose a unit of measurement. According to scientific theories about the Big Bang, our universe is actually a finite size; things can only move so fast, and the universe has only been around for so long, so there is actually a maximum distance things can have moved since the Big Bang. Borges unit to count to infinity was the giant ball that our universe is at this very moment. If our universe is made up of a limited number of particles and objects, then the number of possible universes is also limited (although the number is overwhelmingly large). So as we travel through our imagined infinite space, we will encounter unique unit universes, one by one, until we run out of combinations. Then we must repeat, until we are repeated the same sequences of universes over and over. Overall, we see that our existence is exactly like Borges Library. Space is either finite, or it is infinite and periodic. Either way, Borges came across this philosophical conjecture: our lives, our world, our universe ultimately has order. Many would (and will) disagree with some of the assumptions of this argument, but as long as physics continue to apply outside our world then it would seem that the cosmos are not as random as we would think. All of this comes from the puzzle of infinity. It will certainly continue to baffle philosophers and mathematicians with its paradoxes, but Borges seems to have communicated an insight through his literature that is unique. Is Borges infinity larger than the infinities of other philosophers?

Appendix This essay was difficult to write, and still presents to me a thought that is difficult to think without being overwhelmed by all the different perspectives regarding infinity and its applications in the natural world. I came across a great many philosophers with important ideas about infinity during my research, and you may notice how few names I actually included in the paper. As soon as I really began thinking about my argument, it seemed impossible to keep all my thoughts together, what with all of the arguments and counterarguments of others that I had read. So I spent over five hours simply sorting everything in my mind. I decided which perspectives did not directly have anything to do with my argument. I decided upon a definition of infinity completely independently of any particular scholar. Finally, I found the easiest way to arrive at my definition sensibly building upon the philosophies of certain scholars. At this point I realized it would be foolish to go from Borgess The Library of Babel to my definition, and decided to go in reverse. In the end, the form of the essay attempts to provide the clearest possible map of my own thoughts. It is not likely the clearest possible form of the argument; but I had a very difficult time addressing the argument without digressing. I began by hinting at my interpretation of Borges argument, and then went head-on into introducing the puzzle of infinity. The most important points are the idea of multiple infinities (this puzzled Galileo), and the idea that isolating any single infinity requires a distinction of the unit counting up to infinity. Just before creating the definition based on these two concepts, I made a couple of analogies with the goal of helping readers visualize infinity as an indefinite article such as some. Proceeding, I had only to integrate this definition with Borges th inking about the Library. I feel that without a proper idea of infinity, Borges unlimited but periodic idea has a much lesser impact on readers. It is very easy to dismiss the Library as a metaphor for a hypothetical universe rather than see it as a likeness to our own. However, it is my hope that the reflection on infinity prior to the analysis of The Library of Babel will argue the latter.

Bibliography

Borges, Jorge Luis. Collected Fictions: Jorge Luis Borges / Andrew Hurley. New York: Penguin Books, c1998. Graham, L. R., & Kantor, J. (2009). Naming Infinity: a true story of religious mysticism and mathematical creativity / Loren Graham and Jean-Michel Kantor. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009. Infinity (philosophy). (2013, January 5). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_(philosophy)>. Infinity Quotes. Retrieved March 12, 2013, from <http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/infinity.html>.