The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

There is parallel Universe for every difference

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/23/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 12 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 262 times Debate No: 81393
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




I believe that there is a parallel universe for everything, from my gender to my age, even one where everything is exactly the same except that I took 0.23234357seconds more to brush my teeth this morning.


Thank you for inviting me to this debate, I hope it will be fun and productive for both of us.

As an introduction let me clarify my position:
I am so far not convinced of the existence of any kind of parallel universes and I hope The Instigator (Pro) will provide both evidence as well as a theory for his opinion.

My initial counter argument goes as follows:
Assuming determinism is true, there is logically only one outcome given a specific situation.
That is: "A" must always lead to "B", and can never lead to anything else. By using the word "always" I do not mean that situation "A" can occur multiple times or in multiple places. What I mean is that if one had the possibility to rewind time, "A" would never lead to anything else then "B".

Considering that assumption, even if there are multiple universes, they would all look the same. "A" would lead to "B" in every one of them.

I hope I didn't take the introduction too far. I am eager to read the arguments put forth by Pro.
Debate Round No. 1


MY theory is that in our world a->b
but in another parallel universe it might be a->c
or even!!


Well I certainly respect your beliefs, yet I would have hoped you could back your opinion up with some explanations.

Furthermore it seems in the reality you are describing, there would have to be an infinite amount of universes, and not only that. At every infinitely small period of time all of the infinite amount of universes would have to each(!) split up into an infinite amount of universes.

It seems the theory proposed by Pro implies an utterly absurd reality.
Debate Round No. 2


MasterManav forfeited this round.


too bad...

if anyone else would like to debate this I would be glad to participate :)
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by CJames 1 year ago
Too bad I am late to this one, I would have like to take it on, But I Am going to watch it.
Posted by A1tre 1 year ago
thank you palmertio0 for the clarification. I fear my understanding of quantum mechanics is too limited to debate that issue, allthough there isn't much consensus in science either.

the argument of infinite universes still stands though
Posted by palmertio0 1 year ago
I think pro may be talking about the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, where minute differences may add up to a butterfly effect:
Posted by MasterManav 1 year ago
changed the parameters you should be able to join
Posted by MasterManav 1 year ago
k dude i wil change the parametres give me 5 mins
Posted by A1tre 1 year ago

I would enjoy debating you on this topic. but since I am new here, I seem to not qualify youe rank criteria.
If you change it we could have a great debate
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jonbonbon 12 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had the duty to prove his position. Con successfully provided a counter argument, and pro forfeited at the end, which I count as concession of arguments.