Ironically, your video actually proves my point, as anyone who’s not a dinosaur can see. Electrons are not “tiny bits of matter”. It’s only measurement or, in other words, observation (your video actually identifies the two) which makes electrons behave, or seem, as such bits.
Another mistake the video makes is in presenting measurement/observation as a Platonic activity, immaculate perception, a pure eye just “being open” to the electrons. It fails to point out that such observation actually requires light to be reflected off of the electrons.
I said, as we have been meaning, “infinitely large”, meaning unlimited in all directions. What other parameters are involved (color, density, whatever)is irrelevant.
Infinity is an abstraction that can never be percieved, thus I don’t see how it’s a stretch to say that there could be infinitely large shapes.
The only way we can percieve infiniti is the sense of temporal infinity, something that never reaches an end, and you could have a circle where the end is always getting away from you no matter how far you travel, the end is never reached.
Second of all infinite does not mean unlimited in all directions, there could be an infinite shape which is infinitely large, but has a clear starting point, for instance at 0,0, there is nothing behind 0,0.
It doesn’t matter if you can “perceive” it. What matters is that you understand it. “Infinite” means “no boundary or limit”. And without a boundary, there is no shape to be had.
It can have a “starting point”. But it cannot also have an ending point. And it must have both in order to have “shape” or “form” beyond that of merely a line or plane (both void of having all dimensions). We are discussing the universe. By definition, the universe includes ALL dimensions.
Can I show you a picture of what isn’t there? Hmmm… could be an issue with that. But I can see why you are having trouble understanding. You seem to be trying to picture the absence of something. Logic has the advantage of not requiring pictures, although not excluding them either. It is Logic that informs/reveals that there is no edge. And it seems that Logic is not one of your preferred skills nor confidences.
My confidence is verified Logic. Unfortunately a large part of the verification is merely not being able to find anyone who can rationally disagree. I prefer someone who can also confidently agree. But we live in an age of insecurities and fear governing the lives of far too many people.