Multiverse

[The Sum of Awe]

I never believed in parallel universes, and I still don't. If I weren't a determinist - there'd still be no reason to think that multiple options means multiple universes playing it out. Flip a coin and it lands on heads. Though there was still a chance of getting tails (in a non-determinist world), I don't see why the conclusion is that it did happen in another universe.

Many discussions on the multiverse seem to conceptualize it as bubble universes. That doesn't make sense either. If universes were simply bubbles, they still exist in the same space as other universes, but I don't see how that is if space actually exists in universe, so it solves nothing; instead it simply lowers the rank of the term "universe" and put "multiverse" in its place. So then the question returns, only slightly different: Are there any multi-multiverses?"

I always imagine the concept of multiverses to be parallel to each other. Not in the sense of direction, but simply parallel. All universes would be equally real and pretty much are separate existences. That's just how I liked to imagine them. Do you think that sounds about right

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Another thing: Some consider that literally every scenario plays out, infinite amounts of possibilities. Doesn't this mean that somewhere in the infinite multiverse that someone has learned how to travel to this specific universe and talk about it?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Another thing: Some consider that literally every scenario plays out, infinite amounts of possibilities.

As far as accurate theoretical physics/cosmology (rather than popular representations) goes, the above is usually related either to the variance of physical constants or in relation to the many-world interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics which can be made equivalent to multiverse cosmologies (or rather, can be said to entail certain multiverse cosmologies). Especially in the latter case, the various universes are the instantiations of every result from QM (i.e., although in QM every quantum state will ever only be realized as a single state in our "classical" world, in the MWI every state exists in some universe but only one of them in each).

Doesn't this mean that somewhere in the infinite multiverse that someone has learned how to travel to this specific universe and talk about it?

No more than it does that there must be someone in "the infinite multiverse" who has destroyed all universes but one.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

As far as accurate theoretical physics/cosmology (rather than popular representations) goes, the above is usually related either to the variance of physical constants or in relation to the many-world interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics which can be made equivalent to multiverse cosmologies (or rather, can be said to entail certain multiverse cosmologies). Especially in the latter case, the various universes are the instantiations of every result from QM (i.e., although in QM every quantum state will ever only be realized as a single state in our "classical" world, in the MWI every state exists in some universe but only one of them in each).


No more than it does that there must be someone in "the infinite multiverse" who has destroyed all universes but one.

But then is it really infinite?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

But then is it really infinite?

Some infinities are greater/larger than others (see e.g., my thread "What's a number?"). For example, the set of rational numbers is the same "size' as the set of integers. However, there are more irrational numbers between 0 & 1 then there are either rational numbers as a whole or integers as a whole. Simply put, it is hazardous to treat infinity informally or from a cavalier perspective.

 

[metis]

Why is it necessary to have an opinion whereas we need to believe one way or another with basically not enough information to go on? What's wrong with saying "I don't know"?

 

[Valjean]

The Sum of Awe
That doesn't make sense either.

Physics stopped 'making sense' a century ago. Reality is stranger than we can conceptualize.

 

[oldbadger]

: ........................ Are there any multi-multiverses?" .............................

Probably uncountable numbers of them.....
Astronomers have noticed that some Galaxies are not moving in the correct direction, which suggests powerful attractive forces from beyond our own universe.

We still think small, almost as small as we did when we thought that our World was at the centre of everything.

Chances are there are billions of universes in clusters, and clusters of clusters.

God is very very very big........

That's my guess.....

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Astronomers have noticed that some Galaxies are not moving in the correct direction, which suggests powerful attractive forces from beyond our own universe.

As stated, the above cannot be true. Could you clarify?

 

[JerryL]

I never believed in parallel universes, and I still don't. If I weren't a determinist - there'd still be no reason to think that multiple options means multiple universes playing it out. Flip a coin and it lands on heads. Though there was still a chance of getting tails (in a non-determinist world), I don't see why the conclusion is that it did happen in another universe.

Yes, but you appear ignorant in regards to how quantum waves-functions occur and collapse.

Since you don't appear aware of the observed phenomina which caused the multi-universe model to be created in the first place; I'm not surprised you don't accept the model itself.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Yes, but you appear ignorant in regards to how quantum waves-functions occur and collapse.

Since you don't appear aware of the observed phenomina which caused the multi-universe model to be created in the first place; I'm not surprised you don't accept the model itself.

It's not my topic, but I have read on the subject, more often than not relativity.

 

[oldbadger]

As stated, the above cannot be true. Could you clarify?

It looks as if 'they' are calling 'dark-flow' now.

I typed 'multiverse galaxies moving' into google and found several reports. I picked the first:-

New Proof Unknown "Structures" Tug at Our Universe

"Dark flow" is no fluke, suggests a new study that strengthens the case for unknown, unseen "structures" lurking on the outskirts of creation.

In 2008 scientists reported the discovery of hundreds of galaxy clusters streaming in the same direction at more than 2.2 million miles (3.6 million kilometers) an hour.

This mysterious motion can't be explained by current models for distribution of mass in the universe. So the researchers made the controversial suggestion that the clusters are being tugged on by the gravity of matter outside the known universe.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Since you don't appear aware of the observed phenomina which caused the multi-universe model to be created in the first place; I'm not surprised you don't accept the model itself.

The first 20th century multiverse proposal that I know of was made by Eddington in 1931 based on the idea of an expanding universe which would expand to the point of disconnection between universes. A few dozen other multiverse cosmologies were proposed from that time up to and through Everett. Most were based on deriving solutions to Einstein's equations, Everett's proposal of a relative state interpretation of quantum mechanics being a major exception. However, his proposal was not well-received (and he quit physics to make millions instead) until it was revived and re-christened as the many-worlds interpretation. It was about that time that two other, different motivations "converted" a number of physicists: (eternal) inflationary cosmology and string theory (and its successors e.g., M-theory). Even within a single "class" of multiverses there are variations in their descriptions among physicists. MWI, for example, is a branching of infinitely many universes, not the "bubble" universes of (eternal) inflation cosmology. In fact, in several theories there is only one universe at a time, but multiple universes over time. It is in fact impossible (logically, anyway) to accept all current multiverse cosmologies as some are incompatible.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

It looks as if 'they' are calling 'dark-flow' now.

I typed 'multiverse galaxies moving' into google and found several reports. I picked the first:-

New Proof Unknown "Structures" Tug at Our Universe

"Dark flow" is no fluke, suggests a new study that strengthens the case for unknown, unseen "structures" lurking on the outskirts of creation.

In 2008 scientists reported the discovery of hundreds of galaxy clusters streaming in the same direction at more than 2.2 million miles (3.6 million kilometers) an hour.

This mysterious motion can't be explained by current models for distribution of mass in the universe. So the researchers made the controversial suggestion that the clusters are being tugged on by the gravity of matter outside the known universe.

Ah. Thanks. I remember finding it a little weird that Kashlinsky published his first big paper (the one the article you link to was based on) on his measurements in 2008 with the sub-title "results and cosmological implications), and then the "technical details" of the same study in a separate paper in 2009.

 

[oldbadger]

Ah. Thanks. I remember finding it a little weird that Kashlinsky published his first big paper (the one the article you link to was based on) on his measurements in 2008 with the sub-title "results and cosmological implications), and then the "technical details" of the same study in a separate paper in 2009.

I get the implications of the above. But I heard about it 'on telly' ....... a few scientists (don't know whether they were astronomers, physicists, mathematicians) were discussing this phenomenon. I'll look again and see what I can dig up.

EDIT:- Seems like they don't like it anymore:-
A potential portal to other universes seems to have closed. The sharpest map yet made of light from the infant universe shows no evidence of "dark flow" – a stream of galaxy clusters rushing in the same direction that hinted at the existence of a multiverse.

That is the conclusion of 175 scientists working with data from the European Space Agency's Planck spacecraft. But champions of dark flow are not ready to give up yet, including one Planck scientist who says his team's analysis is flawed.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I get the implications of the above.

Then you inferred something I didn't mean to imply. The studies weren't bad (especially for IOP) and most scientific research turns out to be at least partly wrong. Unfortunately, scientific popularizers can't really interest people with claims about a well-known and long-studied phenomenon, so they report on recent studies (those most likely to be the least accurate). They also tend to misrepresent both the studies' findings and the implications. However, the article you linked to was relatively good as far as over-simplification & sensationalism is concerned (alas, "relative" here means a rather low standard). True, since Kashlinsky's 2008 & 2009 papers we've learned more and the Planck data seems to indicate the kind of velocities suggested by Kashlinsky are ruled out (see e.g.,
Tsagas, C. G., & Kadiltzoglou, M. I. (2013). Peculiar Raychaudhuri equation. Physical Review D, 88(8), 083501. &
Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., Arnaud, M., Ashdown, M., Aumont, J., Baccigalupi, C., ... & Dore, O. (2014). Planck intermediate results. XIII. Constraints on peculiar velocities. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 561.). However, it really wasn't about forces outside of our universe acting on galaxies in the way depicted in the article.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Another thing: Some consider that literally every scenario plays out, infinite amounts of possibilities. Doesn't this mean that somewhere in the infinite multiverse that someone has learned how to travel to this specific universe and talk about it?

And is that you!?! din din dinnnn!! Scary,

 

[Morfinyon]

The multiverse is a very elegant hypothesis and makes a lot of sense to me. It still wouldn't explain what started the whole process, but maybe one day we'll find out. Or maybe there was never a beginning.

 

[oldbadger]

......you didn't include any writing in your post, Revolting. Or is there a glitch in the system?

 

[Revoltingest]

......you didn't include any writing in your post, Revolting. Or is there a glitch in the system?

It's the old ID 10T problem.
Empty post gone now.