Is the multiverse physics, philosophy, or something else entirely?

The idea of the multiverse — or the theoretical possibility of infinite parallel universes—straddles a strange world between science fiction and a plausible hypothesis. Though scientists have no direct evidence for the multiverse’s existence, some theoretical models suggest the multiverse could solve some key riddles in physics, such as why the parameters of our universe, including the strength of the the electromagnetic force between particles and the value of the cosmological constant, have values that are exactly in the small range required for life to exist. Perhaps, some scientists posit in one version of the multiverse theory, there are billions of other universes out there with all different possible values of these parameters—ours just happens to be the one with the right values for life.

More…

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is the multiverse physics, philosophy, or something else entirely?

Though scientists have no direct evidence for the multiverse’s existence, some theoretical models suggest the multiverse could solve some key riddles in physics, such as why the parameters of our universe, including the strength of the the electromagnetic force between particles and the value of the cosmological constant, have values that are exactly in the small range required for life to exist.

More…

It would indeed be a puzzle if any of these parameters were in a range that did not allow life to exist.

We don’t need to hypothesise parallel universes. A single universe varying in either space or time is perfectly adequate.

As for the question, until the multiverse hypothesis comes up with some testable predictions, it remains conjecture.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is the multiverse physics, philosophy, or something else entirely?

Though scientists have no direct evidence for the multiverse’s existence, some theoretical models suggest the multiverse could solve some key riddles in physics, such as why the parameters of our universe, including the strength of the the electromagnetic force between particles and the value of the cosmological constant, have values that are exactly in the small range required for life to exist.

More…

It would indeed be a puzzle if any of these parameters were in a range that did not allow life to exist.

We don’t need to hypothesise parallel universes. A single universe varying in either space or time is perfectly adequate.

As for the question, until the multiverse hypothesis comes up with some testable predictions, it remains conjecture.

Wouldn’t this varying universe have to exist outside of our observable universe and not have any effect on it

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is the multiverse physics, philosophy, or something else entirely?

The idea of the multiverse — or the theoretical possibility of infinite parallel universes—straddles a strange world between science fiction and a plausible hypothesis. Though scientists have no direct evidence for the multiverse’s existence, some theoretical models suggest the multiverse could solve some key riddles in physics, such as why the parameters of our universe, including the strength of the the electromagnetic force between particles and the value of the cosmological constant, have values that are exactly in the small range required for life to exist. Perhaps, some scientists posit in one version of the multiverse theory, there are billions of other universes out there with all different possible values of these parameters—ours just happens to be the one with the right values for life.

More…

Hasn’t this been extended to supposedly have a new universe branch off for every decision anyone makes

there are probably parallel whatevers, but I think they exist in possibility space

so I think it’ll come down to a question like what is possibility space

whatever you want to call it.

Cymek said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is the multiverse physics, philosophy, or something else entirely?

Though scientists have no direct evidence for the multiverse’s existence, some theoretical models suggest the multiverse could solve some key riddles in physics, such as why the parameters of our universe, including the strength of the the electromagnetic force between particles and the value of the cosmological constant, have values that are exactly in the small range required for life to exist.

More…

It would indeed be a puzzle if any of these parameters were in a range that did not allow life to exist.

We don’t need to hypothesise parallel universes. A single universe varying in either space or time is perfectly adequate.

As for the question, until the multiverse hypothesis comes up with some testable predictions, it remains conjecture.

Wouldn’t this varying universe have to exist outside of our observable universe and not have any effect on it

I don’t know about not having any effect, but yes, if there is a single universe with parameters varying in space, the rate of variation would need to be very small, such that it was not detectable (or at least not obvious) to observations from here.

like here’s a dumb idea, conscious creatures face every moment

knowledge of cause and effect, the passage of time (thermodynamics, arrow of time blah blah), and thoughts of what is excluded by what is (or happens, or happened, and what is likely to happen).

the excluded seems to exist in some way. The question is whether it exists only in minds and such.

multiverse stuff is interesting conjecture at present. it is good to get these ideas out there though as who knows what data we already have that may back one theory if only looked at in a different way. this conjecture might get people to look.

The multiverse idea would work a lot easier if universes were simulated inside a computer

transition said:

like here’s a dumb idea, conscious creatures face every moment

knowledge of cause and effect, the passage of time (thermodynamics, arrow of time blah blah), and thoughts of what is excluded by what is (or happens, or happened, and what is likely to happen).

the excluded seems to exist in some way. The question is whether it exists only in minds and such.

I’d say the things that didn’t happen seem not to exist in any way.

>>>We don’t need to hypothesise parallel universes. A single universe varying in either space or time is perfectly adequate.

What if the other universes vary in other ways to our space time

maybe states of matter might be different in another universe

maybe some other properties of a universe might be different, different properties that we dont know about in other universes.

what if the frequency spectrum was different in some way?

what if other universe had a greater number of elements?

or what if another universe had more antimatter than our universe?

Tau.Neutrino said:

>>>We don’t need to hypothesise parallel universes. A single universe varying in either space or time is perfectly adequate.

What if the other universes vary in other ways to our space time

maybe states of matter might be different in another universe

maybe some other properties of a universe might be different, different properties that we dont know about in other universes.

what if the frequency spectrum was different in some way?

what if other universe had a greater number of elements?

or what if another universe had more antimatter than our universe?

What if a single universe showed any of these variations?

Which multiverse? I can think of ten or so different types. One is indisputably real physics. One is probably real physics. Three are heavily debated, but I personally think are all mere philosophy. One has pretty well been ruled out by the large hadron collider. One is almost certainly pure conjecture.

Oh yes, heaven and hell as alternative universes are also pure conjecture.

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

like here’s a dumb idea, conscious creatures face every moment

knowledge of cause and effect, the passage of time (thermodynamics, arrow of time blah blah), and thoughts of what is excluded by what is (or happens, or happened, and what is likely to happen).

the excluded seems to exist in some way. The question is whether it exists only in minds and such.

I’d say the things that didn’t happen seem not to exist in any way.

dunno, I don’t see’t that way

we live every day, and every moment really is made up of this’n that excluding that’n this

the excluded to me are as real as what is, or has been.

transition said:

the excluded to me are as real as what is, or has been.

How can what is not real be as real as what is real?

mollwollfumble said:

Which multiverse? I can think of ten or so different types. One is indisputably real physics. One is probably real physics. Three are heavily debated, but I personally think are all mere philosophy. One has pretty well been ruled out by the large hadron collider. One is almost certainly pure conjecture.

Oh yes, heaven and hell as alternative universes are also pure conjecture.

So what are the indisputably and possibly real ones?

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

the excluded to me are as real as what is, or has been.

How can what is not real be as real as what is real?

If physics allows for it perhaps

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

the excluded to me are as real as what is, or has been.

How can what is not real be as real as what is real?

take any stupid example of something excuded and think about displacement in physical space.

you’re at a computer there, typing shit to me, which makes other possibilities less likely (in fact zero while).

you’re conscious you’re doing that (here, typing shit, thinking about this) – really doing what you’re doing is a long list of things you’re not doing (exclusions, diplacement even). Other things could be happening.

Suggest experiments to distinguish between these possibilities.

transition said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

transition said:

the excluded to me are as real as what is, or has been.

How can what is not real be as real as what is real?

take any stupid example of something excuded and think about displacement in physical space.

you’re at a computer there, typing shit to me, which makes other possibilities less likely (in fact zero while).

you’re conscious you’re doing that (here, typing shit, thinking about this) – really doing what you’re doing is a long list of things you’re not doing (exclusions, diplacement even). Other things could be happening.

So the one thing you are doing is just one possibility out of a ^nearly infinite list of things you could be doing

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

Which multiverse? I can think of ten or so different types. One is indisputably real physics. One is probably real physics. Three are heavily debated, but I personally think are all mere philosophy. One has pretty well been ruled out by the large hadron collider. One is almost certainly pure conjecture.

Oh yes, heaven and hell as alternative universes are also pure conjecture.

So what are the indisputably and possibly real ones?

For me, the indisputably real is physical laws varying with distance. Go far enough and the universe there will have to look vastly different.

For me, the probably real is multiple pockets of cosmic inflation. Everything we know has come from a single bubble of inflation. There are very probably many such bubbles, each a different universe. If you like, and I’m somewhat less sure about this one, extend that idea to the “eternal inflation” multiverse in which many different universes exist not just in space but also at different times at the same point in space.

The three hotly debated multiverses that I dislike are the quantum multiverse, the travel between universes through wormholes, and the (um, I’ll think of it again in a minute).

The multiverse just about ruled out by the large hadron collider are the higher dimensional spaces of string theory, and lower dimensional branes floating through those higher dimensions.

One of many that are almost certainly pure conjecture is the topological multiverse, where space folds back on itself.

Cymek said:

transition said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

How can what is not real be as real as what is real?

take any stupid example of something excuded and think about displacement in physical space.

you’re at a computer there, typing shit to me, which makes other possibilities less likely (in fact zero while).

you’re conscious you’re doing that (here, typing shit, thinking about this) – really doing what you’re doing is a long list of things you’re not doing (exclusions, diplacement even). Other things could be happening.

So the one thing you are doing is just one possibility out of a ^nearly infinite list of things you could be doing

not exactly, there are constraints on what is possible at any moment, but go back far enough and then unfold things differently and there’s a lot of possibility space.

the moment is made up somehow of what has been made less likely (or maybe completely unlikely), however the excluded (made low probability) seems to travel with that happening, and that likely.

I don’t get how it works, but it features as part of human conscious thinking.

or, it could be the product of head injury :)

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

>>>We don’t need to hypothesise parallel universes. A single universe varying in either space or time is perfectly adequate.

What if the other universes vary in other ways to our space time

maybe states of matter might be different in another universe

maybe some other properties of a universe might be different, different properties that we dont know about in other universes.

what if the frequency spectrum was different in some way?

what if other universe had a greater number of elements?

or what if another universe had more antimatter than our universe?

What if a single universe showed any of these variations?

what if there were an infinite number of Universes existing at the same time

as opposed to one universe existing

or what if universes pop in an out of existence?

what if universes pop in and out of existence at every infinite point in nothing?

what if 13 .7 billion years is just a few minutes long in another universe?

> What if there were an infinite number of Universes existing at the same time

Multiple bubbles of cosmic inflation or, more gently, physical laws varying with distance.

> What if universes pop in an out of existence?

Quantum multiverse.

> what if 13 .7 billion years is just a few minutes long in another universe?

Eternal inflation.

Yes, those have all been postulated and codified.

Tau.Neutrino said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

>>>We don’t need to hypothesise parallel universes. A single universe varying in either space or time is perfectly adequate.

What if the other universes vary in other ways to our space time

maybe states of matter might be different in another universe

maybe some other properties of a universe might be different, different properties that we dont know about in other universes.

what if the frequency spectrum was different in some way?

what if other universe had a greater number of elements?

or what if another universe had more antimatter than our universe?

What if a single universe showed any of these variations?

what if there were an infinite number of Universes existing at the same time

as opposed to one universe existing

or what if universes pop in an out of existence?

what if universes pop in and out of existence at every infinite point in nothing?

what if 13 .7 billion years is just a few minutes long in another universe?

As evolution is chance with countless variables. One thing you can be certain about, is it would be nothing like ours.

On the other hand, what if Douglas Adams is correct?

There are a few interesting ideas about multiverses in Dr Who as well.

mollwollfumble said:

On the other hand, what if Douglas Adams is correct?

There are a few interesting ideas about multiverses in Dr Who as well.

And Red Dwarf like what if in one of them Ringo is a really good drummer

mollwollfumble said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

Which multiverse? I can think of ten or so different types. One is indisputably real physics. One is probably real physics. Three are heavily debated, but I personally think are all mere philosophy. One has pretty well been ruled out by the large hadron collider. One is almost certainly pure conjecture.

Oh yes, heaven and hell as alternative universes are also pure conjecture.

So what are the indisputably and possibly real ones?

For me, the indisputably real is physical laws varying with distance. Go far enough and the universe there will have to look vastly different.

For me, the probably real is multiple pockets of cosmic inflation. Everything we know has come from a single bubble of inflation. There are very probably many such bubbles, each a different universe. If you like, and I’m somewhat less sure about this one, extend that idea to the “eternal inflation” multiverse in which many different universes exist not just in space but also at different times at the same point in space.

The three hotly debated multiverses that I dislike are the quantum multiverse, the travel between universes through wormholes, and the (um, I’ll think of it again in a minute).

The multiverse just about ruled out by the large hadron collider are the higher dimensional spaces of string theory, and lower dimensional branes floating through those higher dimensions.

One of many that are almost certainly pure conjecture is the topological multiverse, where space folds back on itself.

OK, I think I agree with that, as far as the likely real ones are concerned anyway.

For me, the indisputably real is physical laws varying with distance. Go far enough and the universe there will have to look vastly different.

no observational evidence for this.

Is speculative physics different to theoretical physics?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is speculative physics different to theoretical physics?

there isn’t really a branch of physics called speculative. it is either theoretical, experimental or sci-fi.

ChrispenEvan said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is speculative physics different to theoretical physics?

there isn’t really a branch of physics called speculative. it is either theoretical, experimental or sci-fi.

Some don’t even think they’re scientists.

ChrispenEvan said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is speculative physics different to theoretical physics?

there isn’t really a branch of physics called speculative. it is either theoretical, experimental or sci-fi.

Physics = theoretical physics?

Tau.Neutrino said:

ChrispenEvan said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Is speculative physics different to theoretical physics?

there isn’t really a branch of physics called speculative. it is either theoretical, experimental or sci-fi.

Physics = theoretical physics?

and experimental. the theory guys come up with the idea and the experiment guys see if it flies.

>Physics = theoretical physics?

there’re the physics too of the physical world, the things themselves, forces or whatever, minus human thought and constructions

ChrispenEvan said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

ChrispenEvan said:

there isn’t really a branch of physics called speculative. it is either theoretical, experimental or sci-fi.

Physics = theoretical physics?

and experimental. the theory guys come up with the idea and the experiment guys see if it flies.

They also start a sentence with “What if.”

dv said:

Suggest experiments to distinguish between these possibilities.

bump

How about this one?

A controversial claim by Laura Mersini-Houghton is that it could be the imprint of another universe beyond our own, caused by quantum entanglement between universes before they were separated by cosmic inflation. Laura Mersini-Houghton said, “Standard cosmology cannot explain such a giant cosmic hole” and made the remarkable hypothesis that the WMAP cold spot is “… the unmistakable imprint of another universe beyond the edge of our own.”

wikipedia

> Standard cosmology cannot explain such a giant cosmic hole.

Bullshit. It’s only two standard deviations or so, negligible.

I feel like we’re living in a parallel universe with Trump as president. It makes me very, very uneasy that such a vile human being is in power.

Divine Angel said:

I feel like we’re living in a parallel universe with Trump as president. It makes me very, very uneasy that such a vile human being is in power.

It’s a worry it seems like powerful individuals are trying their hardest to personally and proxy influence the world into becoming a much less tolerant place.

I have flashbacks to the end of 22.11.63 where JFK wasn’t killed and America was decidedly dystopian.

Divine Angel said:

I have flashbacks to the end of 22.11.63 where JFK wasn’t killed and America was decidedly dystopian.

You’re thinking quantum multiverse here.

But going back and changing history actively is a version of the wormhole multiverse.

Max Tegmark’s multiverse website:

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html

Bubblecar said:

Max Tegmark’s multiverse website:

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html

i like Max.

OK big lump of corned beef now simmering in water, malt vinegar, fresh rosemary, allspice, cloves, cardamom, port wine and a shedload of dried bay leaves from the branch my younger sister gave me last year.

Will be served with pink eyes, carrots, cabbage and a white herb & caper sauce.

Bubblecar said:

OK big lump of corned beef now simmering in water, malt vinegar, fresh rosemary, allspice, cloves, cardamom, port wine and a shedload of dried bay leaves from the branch my younger sister gave me last year.

Will be served with pink eyes, carrots, cabbage and a white herb & caper sauce.

Um, that’s just in this corner of the universe :)

Bubblecar said:

Bubblecar said:

OK big lump of corned beef now simmering in water, malt vinegar, fresh rosemary, allspice, cloves, cardamom, port wine and a shedload of dried bay leaves from the branch my younger sister gave me last year.

Will be served with pink eyes, carrots, cabbage and a white herb & caper sauce.

Um, that’s just in this corner of the universe :)

ha ha ha boom tish