Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Infinite and eternal universe / multiverse

Therammo
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2014 7:01:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Hello, Im new to this forum and I always was a huge fan of space and galaxies. However past 2-3 years Ive been extremely obsessed about the idea that we in fact might live in a multiverse. Ive read tons of books and Ive seen hundreds of videos talking about the fact that we are just a part of a multiverse that is infinite and eternal.

The problem I face with the idea of multiverse and infinity is that, if we in fact are just part of a recycling multiverse that has always existed and will exist for eternity, then we must face the fact that everything that CAN happen WILL eventually happen.

Lets make it more clear; If you play lottery, your chance of winning is like 1 out of few million, but if you played lottery each day for 1 million years, then you will MOST probably win lottery atleast once.

That being said, if we are living in infinite multiverse, then you will be King, sleep with Megan Fox, be president of USA, be most rich person in world, most handsome, most ugly ETC , ETC, ETC.

For people that doesnt have a clue what Im talking about, can watch 'Universe or Multiverse?'on youtube and check back when they understand

For those who understood my topic, I kindly ask you to post your answer or reply to this topic and tell me your thought about this and how you feel that if we are living in infinite multiverse that you will in fact be born again and experience everything that CAN by chance happen. (you will be king in one life, but in other you will be peasent, in third life you will be sick, in fourth life you will be healthy etc.. )
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2014 1:17:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/3/2014 7:01:50 PM, Therammo wrote:
The problem I face with the idea of multiverse and infinity is that, if we in fact are just part of a recycling multiverse that has always existed and will exist for eternity, then we must face the fact that everything that CAN happen WILL eventually happen.

My understanding is that most multiverse theories do not claim that anything that can happen will happen in some universe. The idea I get is that there a certain number of distinguishable branch points that leads to very large number of outcomes, but not necessarily infinite. Even if there are an infinite number, that doesn't mean that everything will happen in some universe. So events can remain excluded, even though there are an infinite number that do happen. By analogy, there are an infinity of real numbers between 0 and 1, but 1.5 is not among them.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2014 2:24:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If there is a multiverse for us to be able to detect it there would have to be some kind of exchange of force between this universe and another. Even then the exchange would only prove one world, or one substrate medium all worlds exist in. If the Universe has a casual effect upon another than the universe is not a closed system and the Zero energy hypothesis would be wrong.

If the universes in the multiverse can not exchange forces than they are unprovable unfalsifiable. And is a movie plot and no more.
Therammo
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2014 7:08:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/5/2014 1:17:26 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 6/3/2014 7:01:50 PM, Therammo wrote:
The problem I face with the idea of multiverse and infinity is that, if we in fact are just part of a recycling multiverse that has always existed and will exist for eternity, then we must face the fact that everything that CAN happen WILL eventually happen.

My understanding is that most multiverse theories do not claim that anything that can happen will happen in some universe. The idea I get is that there a certain number of distinguishable branch points that leads to very large number of outcomes, but not necessarily infinite. Even if there are an infinite number, that doesn't mean that everything will happen in some universe. So events can remain excluded, even though there are an infinite number that do happen. By analogy, there are an infinity of real numbers between 0 and 1, but 1.5 is not among them.
Anything that can happen will happen, its like playing lottery each day, eventually you will win..
Subutai
Posts: 3,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2014 8:41:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/5/2014 2:24:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
If there is a multiverse for us to be able to detect it there would have to be some kind of exchange of force between this universe and another. Even then the exchange would only prove one world, or one substrate medium all worlds exist in. If the Universe has a casual effect upon another than the universe is not a closed system and the Zero energy hypothesis would be wrong.

If the universes in the multiverse can not exchange forces than they are unprovable unfalsifiable. And is a movie plot and no more.

Actually evidence for cosmic inflation, which is backed by a lot of evidence, not the least of which was the observation of gravitational waves, is evidence itself for multverses. Inflation theory posits that certain areas of space-time in the early expanding universe expanded more quickly than others, The areas that expanded more could have created "bubbles" of space-time that siphoned off into new universes. Alan Guth, one of the founders of the inflation theory, said this, "It's hard to build models of inflation that don't lead to a multiverse."

While it is currently still theoretical conjecture, it certainly has a lot of credence.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Therammo
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2014 9:27:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/5/2014 8:41:07 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 6/5/2014 2:24:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
If there is a multiverse for us to be able to detect it there would have to be some kind of exchange of force between this universe and another. Even then the exchange would only prove one world, or one substrate medium all worlds exist in. If the Universe has a casual effect upon another than the universe is not a closed system and the Zero energy hypothesis would be wrong.

If the universes in the multiverse can not exchange forces than they are unprovable unfalsifiable. And is a movie plot and no more.

Actually evidence for cosmic inflation, which is backed by a lot of evidence, not the least of which was the observation of gravitational waves, is evidence itself for multverses. Inflation theory posits that certain areas of space-time in the early expanding universe expanded more quickly than others, The areas that expanded more could have created "bubbles" of space-time that siphoned off into new universes. Alan Guth, one of the founders of the inflation theory, said this, "It's hard to build models of inflation that don't lead to a multiverse."

While it is currently still theoretical conjecture, it certainly has a lot of credence.

It only means there is HUGE chance of multiversen thus, you will live again.. for eternity....
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2014 12:22:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/5/2014 8:41:07 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 6/5/2014 2:24:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
If there is a multiverse for us to be able to detect it there would have to be some kind of exchange of force between this universe and another. Even then the exchange would only prove one world, or one substrate medium all worlds exist in. If the Universe has a casual effect upon another than the universe is not a closed system and the Zero energy hypothesis would be wrong.

If the universes in the multiverse can not exchange forces than they are unprovable unfalsifiable. And is a movie plot and no more.

Actually evidence for cosmic inflation, which is backed by a lot of evidence, not the least of which was the observation of gravitational waves, is evidence itself for multverses. Inflation theory posits that certain areas of space-time in the early expanding universe expanded more quickly than others, The areas that expanded more could have created "bubbles" of space-time that siphoned off into new universes. Alan Guth, one of the founders of the inflation theory, said this, "It's hard to build models of inflation that don't lead to a multiverse."

While it is currently still theoretical conjecture, it certainly has a lot of credence.

The BICEPT2 and Planck observations of gravitational waves discount the 2nd universe. You can't have a zero energy and multiverse hypothesis coexist with the observations made.
Subutai
Posts: 3,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2014 9:30:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/6/2014 12:22:30 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/5/2014 8:41:07 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 6/5/2014 2:24:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
If there is a multiverse for us to be able to detect it there would have to be some kind of exchange of force between this universe and another. Even then the exchange would only prove one world, or one substrate medium all worlds exist in. If the Universe has a casual effect upon another than the universe is not a closed system and the Zero energy hypothesis would be wrong.

If the universes in the multiverse can not exchange forces than they are unprovable unfalsifiable. And is a movie plot and no more.

Actually evidence for cosmic inflation, which is backed by a lot of evidence, not the least of which was the observation of gravitational waves, is evidence itself for multverses. Inflation theory posits that certain areas of space-time in the early expanding universe expanded more quickly than others, The areas that expanded more could have created "bubbles" of space-time that siphoned off into new universes. Alan Guth, one of the founders of the inflation theory, said this, "It's hard to build models of inflation that don't lead to a multiverse."

While it is currently still theoretical conjecture, it certainly has a lot of credence.

The BICEPT2 and Planck observations of gravitational waves discount the 2nd universe. You can't have a zero energy and multiverse hypothesis coexist with the observations made.

You're mixing the cyclic universe model with multiverses. The observation of gravitational waves only discounts the cyclic universe model. It actually strengthens the case for multiverses. Also, why does multiverse theory violate the zero-energy universe hypothesis?
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2014 9:41:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/6/2014 9:30:47 AM, Subutai wrote:
At 6/6/2014 12:22:30 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/5/2014 8:41:07 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 6/5/2014 2:24:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
If there is a multiverse for us to be able to detect it there would have to be some kind of exchange of force between this universe and another. Even then the exchange would only prove one world, or one substrate medium all worlds exist in. If the Universe has a casual effect upon another than the universe is not a closed system and the Zero energy hypothesis would be wrong.

If the universes in the multiverse can not exchange forces than they are unprovable unfalsifiable. And is a movie plot and no more.

Actually evidence for cosmic inflation, which is backed by a lot of evidence, not the least of which was the observation of gravitational waves, is evidence itself for multverses. Inflation theory posits that certain areas of space-time in the early expanding universe expanded more quickly than others, The areas that expanded more could have created "bubbles" of space-time that siphoned off into new universes. Alan Guth, one of the founders of the inflation theory, said this, "It's hard to build models of inflation that don't lead to a multiverse."

While it is currently still theoretical conjecture, it certainly has a lot of credence.

The BICEPT2 and Planck observations of gravitational waves discount the 2nd universe. You can't have a zero energy and multiverse hypothesis coexist with the observations made.

You're mixing the cyclic universe model with multiverses. The observation of gravitational waves only discounts the cyclic universe model. It actually strengthens the case for multiverses. Also, why does multiverse theory violate the zero-energy universe hypothesis?

I'm pretty sure the results also removed a couple of string theory based multiverses off the table. Like the 2 membrane theory.

The reason why I feel they are exclusive is because the zero energy is based on the assumption of a closed system, stating the fundamental actions of space-time and quanta equal 0.

As soon as you add a casual effect with another universe you have one of 2 things happening. The energy in this universe is drained away. or the energy in this universe is added to.

If it was a free flowing balance between 2 universes that would make the other universe have to have the same density and dimensions. Which to me would make it another dimension a hyper dimension of this universe and not a separate universe.
Subutai
Posts: 3,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2014 9:58:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/6/2014 9:41:28 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/6/2014 9:30:47 AM, Subutai wrote:
At 6/6/2014 12:22:30 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/5/2014 8:41:07 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 6/5/2014 2:24:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
If there is a multiverse for us to be able to detect it there would have to be some kind of exchange of force between this universe and another. Even then the exchange would only prove one world, or one substrate medium all worlds exist in. If the Universe has a casual effect upon another than the universe is not a closed system and the Zero energy hypothesis would be wrong.

If the universes in the multiverse can not exchange forces than they are unprovable unfalsifiable. And is a movie plot and no more.

Actually evidence for cosmic inflation, which is backed by a lot of evidence, not the least of which was the observation of gravitational waves, is evidence itself for multverses. Inflation theory posits that certain areas of space-time in the early expanding universe expanded more quickly than others, The areas that expanded more could have created "bubbles" of space-time that siphoned off into new universes. Alan Guth, one of the founders of the inflation theory, said this, "It's hard to build models of inflation that don't lead to a multiverse."

While it is currently still theoretical conjecture, it certainly has a lot of credence.

The BICEPT2 and Planck observations of gravitational waves discount the 2nd universe. You can't have a zero energy and multiverse hypothesis coexist with the observations made.

You're mixing the cyclic universe model with multiverses. The observation of gravitational waves only discounts the cyclic universe model. It actually strengthens the case for multiverses. Also, why does multiverse theory violate the zero-energy universe hypothesis?

I'm pretty sure the results also removed a couple of string theory based multiverses off the table. Like the 2 membrane theory.


It did, but one, those theories aren't refuted. It's more like more has to be formulated to account for the observation. But much more importantly, the most accepted theory, inflationary multiverses, has been strengthened by the theory. Here are two articles about it:

http://www.nature.com...
http://www.scientificamerican.com...
The reason why I feel they are exclusive is because the zero energy is based on the assumption of a closed system, stating the fundamental actions of space-time and quanta equal 0.


But it is still a closed system. Let's assume that the beginning of everything was zero-energy. You've seen my argument that inflation creates a zero-energy universe, and there's no reason that inflation should only happen once. So there's no reason to think multiverses would violate the zero-energy universe theory.
As soon as you add a casual effect with another universe you have one of 2 things happening. The energy in this universe is drained away. or the energy in this universe is added to.

In all universes, the magnitude of the positive matter energy would equal the magnitude of the negative gravitational energy, so no violation occurs.
If it was a free flowing balance between 2 universes that would make the other universe have to have the same density and dimensions. Which to me would make it another dimension a hyper dimension of this universe and not a separate universe.

The idea with multiverses is the areas of the early universe that expanded the most would bulge, and that eventually, the bulge would break away into a new universe.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.