Sharky Posted May 7, 2003 Report Share Posted May 7, 2003 I recently read an article in American Science Magazine on multi-verses. It was quite interesting because it talked about many alternate universes that are exactly like our own with exactly the same chains of events with our exact replica. The only difference was the probability factor that the alternative"me" could decide to not finish reading the aticle or finish it before me etc. That seemed to be a bunch of BS to me because if they looked right under their noses and percieve the concepts "revolving" around the structure of the sphere at their feet they would see that the different multi-verses are actually the different levels of existance of the same universe. The probability factor is caused by the actuallity pertaining to the structure of gravity. Gavity is the center itself that will always exist even if one were to stand there and have it surround them. That observer wuold see that there is yet another center. The multi-verses actually are the material level, the atomic level, the sub-atomic level and the cosmic level in that exact order of existance. The article stated that our universe as we see it has limited distance perception limited to the visible spectrum of the Hubble. I call them "Hubble bubbles." Anyway it's BS. They can't prove it and so what if mathmeticians mathematically prove their existance by saying they have to exist for the simple fact that they eliminate the eluding protrusion of probability cause of certain effects. At least I can really prove my centers exist. Sheesh!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oracle Posted May 8, 2003 Report Share Posted May 8, 2003 Isn't that what Einstein strongly opposed? I think his theory was that all the parallel alternatives "die out" after the presant action. Like if you flip a coin the options exist it might fall heads or tails once in fall on heads that oportunity for t. doesn't exist anymore.I suggest the book Parallel universes by Fred Allan Wolf for that it explains alot of stuff and gives you the opportunity to creat some beliefs on your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJG Posted August 13, 2003 Report Share Posted August 13, 2003 Unless there was a different initial condition, cause and effect would be the same in a parallel universe so your options, decisions, and actions would be identical. If a condition differed, then the universes would not be parallel. Linda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted August 13, 2003 Report Share Posted August 13, 2003 It really depends on what the "initial condition" is. If you factor in the randomness of space at quantum levels, there is no way to know whether two universes with similar starting points turn out to be equal. I strongly doubt that two universes could be exactly the same! The term "parallell universes" is interesting. I don't think it is correct to assume that two universes have to be replicas of each other to be parallell. This is a rather esoteric idea, though...does it, for example, demand that time flows in the exact same rate? I don't think it's necessary. To me, parallell universes simply mean "more than one universe" - so it's a subset of the multiverse. Am I making sense at all? tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deamonstar Posted August 14, 2003 Report Share Posted August 14, 2003 the term "parallel universe" is indeed quite misleading.many people eroneously assume that 'parallel' means the same as 'identical' when refering to universal structure. this kind of assumption can lead one to interpret many sorts of paradoxies into how the universe functions. this need not be the case however. for those that have read my postulate concerning gravity, you may well be aware that my idea of the universes expansion could be analogous to ripples in a pond (in my original post, I said that I would explain a single wave for easier explanation).the idea of 'parallel' universes could be better explained as sets of concentric universes propagating outwards from the point of the big bang, much as ripples in a pond do when a pebble is dropped into its center. with each wave being a universe unto itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJG Posted August 15, 2003 Report Share Posted August 15, 2003 Hold on, guys! There is no evidence for parallel or any universe other than the one we perceive. The Science Magazine article on multi-verses talked about many alternate universes that are "exactly like our own with exactly the same chains of events with our exact replica" which means the identical initial condition. It would be impossible for any differences to exist. The probability factor that "the alternative"me" could decide to not finish reading the aticle or finish it before me etc." would be zero. In chaos theory, the Lorenz strange attractor would be evident eventually only if there were differences in the initial conditions. Nevertheless, the results, could always be determined. There is no such thing as true randomness. I posted a hypography earlier this year (that needs to be updated) about determinism and free will which has many references to the theories. The multiverse notion is pure speculation. Makes good science fiction material. Linda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dent Posted November 6, 2003 Report Share Posted November 6, 2003 The multiverse concept can be seen as infinate steps of choice with every possible route catered for incase the decision is made .The possibility waves linger for choice and could even create the on set of possible choice until the physical path is chosen and the wave function collapse to the true decision ...... and intern creates more possibility waves to cater for more choice. Whether the possibility waves create whole Alternate universes is a matter of opinion. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts