How I Know There is Only One Universe
2011-11-30 at 11:44:28

How do I know there's only one universe? The same reason I know time travel to the past is impossible. If it were possible, we'd already see evidence of it because somebody would have already been back here (even if they weren't supposed to).

How does this relate to multiple universes? Well, the only reason we have a multiverse theory is because the possibility of our existence is so remote, scientists realized it was illogical to believe life could spring up into existence in one universe. But, if you posit an infinite number of universes, well, then... ANYTHING is possible!

And therein is your problem. It's kinda like the grandpa paradox for time travel. The one thing that destroys this entire multiverse stupidity is that in one of those infinite universes, someone has discovered not only how to travel to other universes, but how to destroy them all. And since we're still here, well...

There's only one universe, and we're in it. Any other theory is simply a fairy tale.


Guest5
2012-02-08 09:43:48
 

And what if that there is other universes and the inhabitants think that there's is the only one huh? and what if they are less technoligical or if ours was the first of meny like the domino effect

 
 
 
Jōl
2012-02-21 11:25:28
 

The fallacy you are committing is confusing "anything is possible" with "everything possible has happened." That our universe has not been destroyed by multi-dimensional Vandals is not evidence that it won't in the future. The likelihood of me dying are 100% by any reasonable standards, so it must really blow your mind that I'm able to type this...

ooooOOOoooOOOOo (from beyond the grave!) ooOOOooOooOOOoooo

 
 
 
Jōl
2012-02-24 07:02:38
 

Well, if I understand it right (and there is clearly no reason to think that I do), it's the offshoot of a couple of quantum-physics equations. I don't think anyone legitimately studying the phenomenon is doing so on a practical level -- yet.

But you also have to consider the nature of infinity. On the one hand you have a possible world where a technological (or magic, or whatever) species is able to pull back the curtain and move between universes. On the other hand you have a multiverse where this can never happen. Each of these could be expressed as a percentage of infinity. Infinity is unlimited in all directions. Infinity / Infinity = Infinity. Maybe it's just a shortcoming of our math -- or our brains.

Until we -- meaning humans on our earth -- have OBSERVED all possible outcomes of every interaction of every paticle/wave in existance -- as well as those that are only potentially extant -- (which is clearly impossible) it is fair to say that the Vandal scenario HAS happened, WILL happen, and CAN'T happen. All at the same time. According to a multi-world hypothesis, anyway.

But remind yourself that this is only one interpretation of some of the weird stuff that happens on the subatomic level, and has plenty of critics with a far greater understanding than you or I. I'm only saying that out of infinite possibilities, an infinite number of those involve our universe remaining unmolested at least until I hit the "Add Comment" button.

 
Jōl
2012-03-01 11:46:02
 

I should mention that I realize that you aren't really interested in quantum states or proposed multi-world models and that you're just reacting to some creationist agitprop you were fed, and I'd like to also point out the problem with that:

No scientist (or anyone else familiar with basic logic for that matter) would feel compelled to create any elaborate scenario to allow for low-probability events. You figure (more likely: AiG figures) that "the possibility of our existence is so remote, scientists realized it was illogical to believe life could spring up into existence in one universe." Nonsense. Even if the possibility is remote, that there is a universe makes even remote chances enough.

Imagine I walk into a casino, up to a craps table, and roll the dice once. I _could_ roll boxcars on the first go. It's happened (and the payout is great), though not to me. You could stand there and scream all day that the odds of rolling boxcars is less than 1%, but even if I'd never handled dice before and never did again, I don't have to stand there and roll the dice thirty-six times just to get that one result.

Likewise if I were to try something completely novel that nobody ever even thought of before -- let's say blorking. So I invent blorking and on the very first try, I triple-Flazoo. It might take me a while to realize the sheer improbability of a triple-Flazoo, but the very fact that I blorked at all (and my MacBook Pro would much prefer I was *blocking* instead) ensured that I would achieve at least one possible outcome, no matter the odds of that particular outcome compared to other possible outcomes.

So it's silly to think that multi-world hypotheses were invented to satisfy some silly odds calculation where the variables are impossible to know and with no other results to compare when we know we have a result.

unlikely ≠ impossible = good enough

 
 
 
Jōl
2012-03-20 06:38:26
 

Take it easy, there. Maybe you shouldn't blow your ammunition all at once. Toy with your opponent. Hint at it for a bit -- probe at the weaknesses of your opponent's argument with a couple of 'I'm rubber and you're glue,' with just a dash of, 'your mother,' until he sees the utter frivolity of his argument. Then, just when he's questioning his decision to contradict you in the first place, THAT'S when you unleash the debate world's equivalent of the atomic bomb: 'hey, there's some random guy in an Internet forum who's just as wrong as I am!'

 
 
 
Jōl
2012-03-22 15:24:08
 

Multiverse hypotheses arose as an explanation (in quantum theory) for the strange behavior of some subatomic particles. Nobody except some dumb post on that creationist nod-blog claims multiverse hypotheses have any relation to the origins of life on earth.

Oh, and you.

It's a fake position posited for ~evil science~ 'cause ~evil science~'s real positions are hard to argue against.

 
 
 
Joey
2012-05-26 09:43:28
 

So much for all that dodging.

 

Add Your Comment

Login or Signup to post with privileges.
 
Name:
Your Comment:
Leave the box to the right empty. It's a honeypot to catch spam. HAHAHA!
Time to process blocks: 0.98 seconds. / Time to run index.esp: 0.00 seconds. / DB Queries: 49+cache(1)