## Categories

- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,009)

## Recent Questions

- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
- Do people with Down syndrome understand that they have abnormalities? How do they see the world? Are they self-conscious about their illness?

The theorver says that the probability of hitting a random variable “at a point” is zero if the distribution law of this random variable is continuous at this point. If you try to translate it into our language, it means that there may not be a zero probability of a “very similar” world , but not exactly the same 1 in 1.

In addition, if we recall physics and the 2nd law of thermodynamics – that entropy in a closed system cannot decrease with time( and the whole universe is a closed system, because nothing” outside the universe ” interacts with it). This means that the entropy in the universe will definitely never be the same as it is now.

Moreover, there are several theoretically possible scenarios for the so-called “death of the universe” – both from the same 2nd law of thermodynamics, and due to the fact that space is expanding and even with acceleration. So in these possible hypothetical scenarios, there will be a state of the universe in which nothing can happen . At all. Nothing happens. Is it even possible to talk about time in this case ? What will be the time in such a universe ? so the infinity of time is also questionable.

PS in the paragraph about the theorver, I did not mention that there are possible events with zero probability, and in this context this is exactly the case, but it takes too long to explain what this means and the conclusion will not change – a purely mathematical probability will be infinitely small, and given physics, the answer will be negative.