I was thinking more in terms of objects and representing them with symbols seems to clarify such thoughts.

Cosmologists try to write the beginning of the universe by looking far out into space and therefore back in time. I think it is much easier to look right in front of ones face to see how infinite diversity emerges from interaction. It seems more logical to work backwards right here, than grope with limited data out there.

Human procreation illustrates how two can create an infinite number. If take into account tales of immaculate conception or parthogenesis than one human female has the potential to create an infinite number.

If anything exists - it seems to demand an infinite potential.

The known universe keeps offering staggering potential infinities. What is not so plain to see is whether these potentials are fulfilled. Does potential demand expression in some form? In other words, if it can exist - must it exist somewhere, in some parallel/alternate universe?

If humanity exists here, must it also exist elsewhere?
If life exists here must it also exist elsewhere?

How can we determine such a fantastic premise?

Well, we can look at A again. For A to 'transmogrify' we need a catalyst. That would immediately demand B to be added to the mix. If A & B exist and interact then we have another infinite potential.

Can A exist alongside B and never influence each the other? I don't think so. As symbols they can remain separate, but in the 'real world' all things are interlinked. Where in the universe can A & B be placed so that they have absolutely no influence each on the other?

I think this is why evolution is mandatory and a byproduct of the most subtle influences. It is hard to imagine we are being influenced by galaxies millions of light years away, yet we are. We may not know exactly how this influence manifests, but we can extrapolate its existence.

The only way the universe cannot be infinite as far as I can determine is if A does not exist and all this is nothing. Everything=nothing. And since we are here discussing it - I suspect A does exist, infinity exists and that all things are formed by interaction of an infinite number of infinite potentials.

Do we live in:

A) an infinite universe of potential infinities.
B) an infinite universe of realized infinities.

I don't think it's possibe to live in:

C) a finite universe of potential infinities

It seems impossible for something finite to spawn something infinite - unless that 'finite' thing is really 'infinite' to begin with. That would mean A had its own internal catalyst and didn't need B.

That's where time comes in. Does time really exist? Is the infinity of A fullfilled immediately by its very existence? Or does A remain a potential infinity growing exponentially via time? Do we thinking beings interpret A to be finite because we can't see it's infinite nature? And does that mean time is really just an artifact of consciousness and all humanity cursed to see a glimpse of the universe but never the totality?

If that's the case than one does not need A and B to exist to create an infinite universe, one merely needs A.

That means if anything exists - we live in an infinite universe.

Such a thought goes against the grain of singular thinking.

Pardon the rambling. It's just fun thinking these things out. Every time they emerge slightly different - no doubt an artifact of living in an infinite universe.

;-)