Many worlds and parallel universes
Discussion
eharding said:
AshVX220 said:
Does infinity have to abide by the rules of physics as we understand them? So, for example in one of these universes, is there someone (We'll call him Han Solo) flying a star ship that is more than capable of travelling faster than light?
If there are infinite possibilities, then the physical universe as we understand it must have rules that can be broken.
Now, for a forum predominantly made up of agnostics or atheists (as I am one too), in one of these universes there actually is a God, that created that universe (possibly only 6000 years ago).
There's a Universe where Rick grimes is spending his days killing Zombies, or where Jon Snow knows nothing!
Just reflect on the fact that there is at least one Universe where you are Diane Abbott....and in all possible Universes, there is a techiedave cyber-perving in pursuit of you.If there are infinite possibilities, then the physical universe as we understand it must have rules that can be broken.
Now, for a forum predominantly made up of agnostics or atheists (as I am one too), in one of these universes there actually is a God, that created that universe (possibly only 6000 years ago).
There's a Universe where Rick grimes is spending his days killing Zombies, or where Jon Snow knows nothing!
Then just be very, very thankful that this isn't that Universe. Yet.
...
...
...
...
...
......
I think in the world of maths, which is also the language of science, the concept of infinity can be used to give some accurate results on predictions.
But, the concept of infinity with its variations of series probably means that it may not have a universal application.
Infinity is not a number, I view it as a substitute for an unknown quantity or a missing link in the chain that can approximate the measured result or concept.
So with this in mind I accept that "multiverse/many worlds" theory has its place in the language of maths, but my mere single human brain with its limited understanding can not accept it as a real or accurate description of reality.... however one then starts to define what actually is the meaning of "reality"
I value Einstein's approach where he always looked for the basic relationships that formed beautiful equations.
And with that I already quickly find the limit of my understanding on a 'theory of everything'.
The fundamental point that I have trouble accepting with the multiverse theory is that at any instance every possibility that could exist splits off in to its own existence via a 'parallel universe'.
So, I may be missing some fundamental constraints on this theory, but wouldn't that be then a case of "infinity x infinity" on every plank length second of existence for every plank length element of particle?
Is this a problem in itself, may be not?.... but is it more just a case of a result of processing the concept of infinity through maths equations and then not having an accurate method of validation once the results pop out on the other side?
(ie. Not having proper validation because we can only measure a relatively small amount within our observable universe - which, beyond observable limits, may be much much larger than what we currently know)
But, the concept of infinity with its variations of series probably means that it may not have a universal application.
Infinity is not a number, I view it as a substitute for an unknown quantity or a missing link in the chain that can approximate the measured result or concept.
So with this in mind I accept that "multiverse/many worlds" theory has its place in the language of maths, but my mere single human brain with its limited understanding can not accept it as a real or accurate description of reality.... however one then starts to define what actually is the meaning of "reality"
I value Einstein's approach where he always looked for the basic relationships that formed beautiful equations.
And with that I already quickly find the limit of my understanding on a 'theory of everything'.
The fundamental point that I have trouble accepting with the multiverse theory is that at any instance every possibility that could exist splits off in to its own existence via a 'parallel universe'.
So, I may be missing some fundamental constraints on this theory, but wouldn't that be then a case of "infinity x infinity" on every plank length second of existence for every plank length element of particle?
Is this a problem in itself, may be not?.... but is it more just a case of a result of processing the concept of infinity through maths equations and then not having an accurate method of validation once the results pop out on the other side?
(ie. Not having proper validation because we can only measure a relatively small amount within our observable universe - which, beyond observable limits, may be much much larger than what we currently know)
Dr Jekyll said:
Is this still a respectable if minority interpretation of quantum effects? Or is it discredited totally?
It's respectable and indeed fairly mainstream. It also seems completely mad, but that is QM's "fault", not MWI's.The best question to ask of any theory or interpretation is, "Is it testable?". I.e. does it make any difference? Can you think of an experiment that would demonstrate if it were true or false? For MWI the answer seems to be "maybe". Some experiments have been proposed but they require experimental equipment that is currently completely impractical at best, and at worst may not be physically possible (in which case the proposed experiments aren't actually experiments at all).
about Hugh Everett III said:
He was smart in a very broad way. I mean, to go from chemical engineering to mathematics to physics and spending most of the time buried in a science fiction book, I mean, this is talent.
Smart cookieAshVX220 said:
If there are infinite possibilities, then the physical universe as we understand it must have rules that can be broken.
Now, for a forum predominantly made up of agnostics or atheists (as I am one too), in one of these universes there actually is a God, that created that universe (possibly only 6000 years ago).
There's a Universe where Rick grimes is spending his days killing Zombies, or where Jon Snow knows nothing!
THe rules may not have always been the same.Now, for a forum predominantly made up of agnostics or atheists (as I am one too), in one of these universes there actually is a God, that created that universe (possibly only 6000 years ago).
There's a Universe where Rick grimes is spending his days killing Zombies, or where Jon Snow knows nothing!
Efbe said:
infinite cannot exist.
Because if it did exist then the probability of everything happening becomes a certainty of everything possible to happen. Therefore you have a conundrum. But there is no wormhole in my living room right now, so everything didn't happen that could happen.
There are wormholes in your living room right now.Because if it did exist then the probability of everything happening becomes a certainty of everything possible to happen. Therefore you have a conundrum. But there is no wormhole in my living room right now, so everything didn't happen that could happen.
Halb said:
Efbe said:
infinite cannot exist.
Because if it did exist then the probability of everything happening becomes a certainty of everything possible to happen. Therefore you have a conundrum. But there is no wormhole in my living room right now, so everything didn't happen that could happen.
There are wormholes in your living room right now.Because if it did exist then the probability of everything happening becomes a certainty of everything possible to happen. Therefore you have a conundrum. But there is no wormhole in my living room right now, so everything didn't happen that could happen.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff