The Expansion Theory of Multiple Universes

Apparently it is becoming more clear that it is likely there are a multitude of universes so as this becomes more and more a reality there are natural questions. Adding to the possibility is what these universes probably consist of. Some may be vastly different even in the physics properties, some may be like ours and some may be an exact duplicate of ours. If you ponder this possibility does it impact you in any way in terms of God, the after life or your soul? To me it is a fantastic thing and hopefully they will prove it to beyond any doubt. To me, the greatest idea is one of different laws of physics and another that is an exact duplicate of ours. Listening to the explanations of this theory (what there is that I can understand) I cannot think of anything greater to ponder.

someone once explained the multiverse concept as bubbles in a glass of soda. kind of neat to think of it that way.

rhinefire said:

If you ponder this possibility does it impact you in any way in terms of God, the after life or your soul?

Click to expand...

God is love, there is no afterlife and ones soul is the influence left behind. None of this changes.

God is God, there is an afterlife, and what we do in this life matters. None of this changes for me.

rhinefire said:

Apparently it is becoming more clear that it is likely there are a multitude of universes so as this becomes more and more a reality there are natural questions. Adding to the possibility is what these universes probably consist of. Some may be vastly different even in the physics properties, some may be like ours and some may be an exact duplicate of ours. If you ponder this possibility does it impact you in any way in terms of God, the after life or your soul? To me it is a fantastic thing and hopefully they will prove it to beyond any doubt. To me, the greatest idea is one of different laws of physics and another that is an exact duplicate of ours. Listening to the explanations of this theory (what there is that I can understand) I cannot think of anything greater to ponder.

Click to expand...

It sounds like a Monte Carlo simulation or an industrial production process. A very intelligent design, indeed.

rhinefire said:

Apparently it is becoming more clear that it is likely there are a multitude of universes so as this becomes more and more a reality there are natural questions. Adding to the possibility is what these universes probably consist of. Some may be vastly different even in the physics properties, some may be like ours and some may be an exact duplicate of ours. If you ponder this possibility does it impact you in any way in terms of God, the after life or your soul? To me it is a fantastic thing and hopefully they will prove it to beyond any doubt. To me, the greatest idea is one of different laws of physics and another that is an exact duplicate of ours. Listening to the explanations of this theory (what there is that I can understand) I cannot think of anything greater to ponder.

Click to expand...

We seem to be getting to a pivot point when it comes consideration of The Expansion Theory of Multiple Universes or Variation Expansion Space / Time Bubbles. And it also seems to come down to a concept of "multiverse" in terms of universes existing in parallel disposition to each other perhaps with different orientations for laws of physics and/or in terms of universes expanding at different rates where such laws may not exist in properties we can even define them.

If you think about any bubble model that is based upon an inflation oriented expansion, say exponential growth in any direction (or all directions,) then it becomes a challenge to build that model without seeing a "multiverse" condition develop. Now this is way out on left field theoretical physics but if a local model shows that phenomenon then what is stopping the universe as we see it and define it from doing the same? So now you can at least confirm the idea using local models that there is an inherent, not accidental, link between inflation oriented expansion and "multiverse." And you can then theorize that inflation oriented expansion is in itself instability (how can it be otherwise? It is not a constant... or so we think.)

50 years ago this theory would be dismissed with ease. And even today we can be skeptical but at least today (and more so tomorrow) we can look outward into the universe and look for inflation oriented expansion in a way the bubble models suggest. Even if today they are limited by using light, or microwave background radiation, there may be other means down the road to view said expansion. If there is any truth to big bang at all, as well as if there is any truth to variation in laws of physics as we know them to be constants, then it becomes more plausible that alternate universes of some degree exist in a way our own laws prevent us from interacting with them on our terms. So, parallel and probably governed by their own properties undefinable as of today.

The crux of the theory is finding that microwave background radiation in a manner not consistent with our universe. Say a bubble within a bubble that is expanding in a manner undefinable in comparison to what we do define. That has not happened yet, but is exciting to consider as it tells us our universe may have plenty of parallels to others and even exist within one another. And even crazier question, is our expanding universe existing within another or are are others expanding within ours? (Or, both?) Better than all of that, was Big Bang simply a result of other expansive universes hitting a point of such instability perhaps interacting with one another that ours was created?

In terms you have put forth here, our relationship to systems of belief (God) then things get more interesting. Is one (or more) of the parallel universes something we define in deity terms? There are plenty of people within the Quantum Sciences fields suggesting we are at least confirming the idea of bridging the gap between what we define in our universe terms and others. If there is a deity in how we define it, was it simply a measure of what we could understand then and now? Were as tomorrow deity may have an entire new meaning? And that is often the case, science and discovery tends to push systems of belief to evolve. Just as we have, just as the universe has, just as just about every inflation oriented expansion model shows has.

ecofarm said:

God is love, there is no afterlife

Click to expand...

I agree.

ecofarm said:

and ones soul is the influence left behind. None of this changes.

Click to expand...

I had not thought of this definition of the soul; it is a good one.

rhinefire said:

Apparently it is becoming more clear that it is likely there are a multitude of universes so as this becomes more and more a reality there are natural questions. Adding to the possibility is what these universes probably consist of. Some may be vastly different even in the physics properties, some may be like ours and some may be an exact duplicate of ours. If you ponder this possibility does it impact you in any way in terms of God, the after life or your soul? To me it is a fantastic thing and hopefully they will prove it to beyond any doubt. To me, the greatest idea is one of different laws of physics and another that is an exact duplicate of ours. Listening to the explanations of this theory (what there is that I can understand) I cannot think of anything greater to ponder.

Click to expand...

As soon as I heard about the multiple universes especially parallel universes then I accepted it immediately as it fit perfectly into my understanding of God.

Often times I find that scientific discoveries really are just discoveries of God and that holds true with me.

As like the "Big Bang" is a proof of the Creation Day, and evolution is a proof that an Intelligent Design is still ongoing and in the process.

The multitude of universes would include that anyone who dies in this universe is still living onward in another universe where they did not die, which means that every person lives to the maximum of our life span, and it gives sense to the concept of being "born again" and of "past life" and even to reincarnation, because the universes being parallel means that we can cross over from one universe to another very easily without ever knowing it, and yet once we do know about it then we can start to feel it or recognize it as it happens.

It even gives insight for spirits and ghost being in other dimensions / other universes.

And it gives a before-unknown justice to God, because God is so harshly criticized for letting evil things to happen, and now we find out that the evil happened here but it did not happen in other realities, and it means that we all have counter parts to our self which went on living differently.

The discovery of parallel universes was a beautiful discovery of a wonderful and truly loving Father God who has worked out ever angle possible.

rhinefire said:

Apparently it is becoming more clear that it is likely there are a multitude of universes so as this becomes more and more a reality there are natural questions. Adding to the possibility is what these universes probably consist of. Some may be vastly different even in the physics properties, some may be like ours and some may be an exact duplicate of ours. If you ponder this possibility does it impact you in any way in terms of God, the after life or your soul? To me it is a fantastic thing and hopefully they will prove it to beyond any doubt. To me, the greatest idea is one of different laws of physics and another that is an exact duplicate of ours. Listening to the explanations of this theory (what there is that I can understand) I cannot think of anything greater to ponder.

Click to expand...

No why would it impact me?

rhinefire said:

Apparently it is becoming more clear that it is likely there are a multitude of universes so as this becomes more and more a reality there are natural questions.

Click to expand...

OrphanSlug said:

We seem to be getting to a pivot point when it comes consideration of The Expansion Theory of Multiple Universes or Variation Expansion Space / Time Bubbles.

Click to expand...

JP Cusick said:

The discovery of parallel universes was a beautiful discovery of a wonderful and truly loving Father God who has worked out ever angle possible.

Click to expand...

Yeah I'm going to need some semblance of a source on any of these claims.

While theorizing about multiverses can be interesting, and they certainly pose some interesting philosophical questions, I don't believe there is any evidence for the multiverse, nor has any falsifiable experiment been devised.

Nilly said:

Yeah I'm going to need some semblance of a source on any of these claims.

While theorizing about multiverses can be interesting, and they certainly pose some interesting philosophical questions, I don't believe there is any evidence for the multiverse, nor has any falsifiable experiment been devised.

Click to expand...

Virtually all new inventions and discoveries had to first be believed before being proven.

We each need to have some vision or else we can not see.

As like Columbus first had to believe that the world was round before he could convince himself or anyone else to send out ships going west to get to the east.

Having extra-curricular vision might be the only way to know the fantastic truths in our own lifetime, as we do not have enough time to wait for others to do all of the work.

JP Cusick said:

As like Columbus first had to believe that the world was round before he could convince himself or anyone else to send out ships going west to get to the east.

Click to expand...

That is a myth. Roger Bacon wrote about the curvature of the Earth in the thirteenth century.


"Take for example the idea that the people of the Middle Ages thought the earth was flat. It simply isn't true. And yet the New York Times takes it as gospel and, indeed, some get quite cross when you try to tell them that people in the Middle Ages were quite aware that the world was round.

The idea that they thought it was flat was invented by an American journalist by the name of Washington Irving. In 1828, he wrote a biography of Columbus in which he described the great man confronting the Church leaders who accused him of heresy for claiming the earth was round when the Church taught that it was flat.

The meeting never happened and the Church never taught that the earth was flat. Irving simply made it all up. And yet it's stuck. It's just one of the many, many misconceptions about the medieval world that we don't seem able to shake off."

Terry Jones: The Middle Ages of reason | Education | The Guardian

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDXrpNk3fy4&spfreload=10

zyzygy said:

That is a myth. Roger Bacon wrote about the curvature of the Earth in the thirteenth century.

Click to expand...

The point was (and remains) that we must have vision in order to see the reality of multiple universes and parallel universes.

Surely there were very many people who believed the earth to be flat, and those people lived long lives without knowing the earth was a globe.

So too if we today fail to see the reality of multiple universes then you shall die without ever knowing, but I will live while knowing as I can see it.

JP Cusick said:

Surely there were very many people who believed the earth to be flat, and those people lived long lives without knowing the earth was a globe.

Click to expand...

All sailors knew that the Earth was round, otherwise why did other ships disappear under the horizon? People on land knew that the higher up you went, the further you could see. Give our ancestors some credit. The ancient Greeks knew that the world was round.

JP Cusick said:

So too if we today fail to see the reality of multiple universes then you shall die without ever knowing, but I will live while knowing as I can see it.

Click to expand...

The last part of your sentence does not parse. What special powers do you have that enable you to see these multiple universes?

zyzygy said:

The last part of your sentence does not parse. What special powers do you have that enable you to see these multiple universes?

Click to expand...

its not a power but a magic potion.

Qewlaihd

JP Cusick said:

As soon as I heard about the multiple universes especially parallel universes then I accepted it immediately as it fit perfectly into my understanding of God.

Often times I find that scientific discoveries really are just discoveries of God and that holds true with me.

As like the "Big Bang" is a proof of the Creation Day, and evolution is a proof that an Intelligent Design is still ongoing and in the process.

The multitude of universes would include that anyone who dies in this universe is still living onward in another universe where they did not die, which means that every person lives to the maximum of our life span, and it gives sense to the concept of being "born again" and of "past life" and even to reincarnation, because the universes being parallel means that we can cross over from one universe to another very easily without ever knowing it, and yet once we do know about it then we can start to feel it or recognize it as it happens.

It even gives insight for spirits and ghost being in other dimensions / other universes.

And it gives a before-unknown justice to God, because God is so harshly criticized for letting evil things to happen, and now we find out that the evil happened here but it did not happen in other realities, and it means that we all have counter parts to our self which went on living differently.

The discovery of parallel universes was a beautiful discovery of a wonderful and truly loving Father God who has worked out ever angle possible.

Click to expand...

Strangely, you and I are thinking in parrellel directions with one major difference.

I have long believed that when we die, our soul, spirit, intelligence, etc goes to what I refer to as an alternate universe right here with us. The only difference is that I do not believe there is a "Person" God, but rather (think Star Wars) an unknown natural force that has created us. ( LET THE FORCE BE WITH YOU"

Nilly said:

Yeah I'm going to need some semblance of a source on any of these claims.

While theorizing about multiverses can be interesting, and they certainly pose some interesting philosophical questions, I don't believe there is any evidence for the multiverse, nor has any falsifiable experiment been devised.

Click to expand...

Not directly, which I said in the post. The first part of the bold text above is somewhat right, the second is way off.

It all has to do with models that are based upon an inflationary oriented expansion. When that happens you end up with "multiverse" conditions so often it becomes a challenge to not see them. But that is another step, the first step has to do with confirmation of our universe expanding in a manner the models suggest.

All of that is down the road. Not everyone in the field has bought into what the models are telling us today but there seems to be more interest in the subject the further we get with how these models react.

But where they are with this work...

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/multiverse.pdf

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/PDF/multiverse_sciam.pdf

JP Cusick said:

Virtually all new inventions and discoveries had to first be believed before being proven.

We each need to have some vision or else we can not see.

As like Columbus first had to believe that the world was round before he could convince himself or anyone else to send out ships going west to get to the east.

Having extra-curricular vision might be the only way to know the fantastic truths in our own lifetime, as we do not have enough time to wait for others to do all of the work.

Click to expand...

Hypotheses should follow data. Not the other way around. Nobody believed in quantum mechanics until the data told us over and over again 'something strange is going on here'. It's as Asimov said, "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'". Preconceived notions are often more dangerous than skepticism.

OrphanSlug said:

Not directly, which I said in the post. The first part of the bold text above is somewhat right, the second is way off.

It all has to do with models that are based upon an inflationary oriented expansion. When that happens you end up with "multiverse" conditions so often it becomes a challenge to not see them. But that is another step, the first step has to do with confirmation of our universe expanding in a manner the models suggest.

All of that is down the road. Not everyone in the field has bought into what the models are telling us today but there seems to be more interest in the subject the further we get with how these models react.

But where they are with this work...

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/multiverse.pdf

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/PDF/multiverse_sciam.pdf

Click to expand...

Models for multiverses exist, and a level 1 multiverse may even be heavily implied by an infinite universe. But that doesn't mean these models are falsifiable in the slightest. String theory is another model which has no evidence and is completely unfalsifiable. Both theories are yet to come up with a single independent verifiable prediction. Unfortunately, we've been at an impasse for the last few decades when it comes to theoretical physics, physical limitations mean that the experimental side of things can't keep up to validate theory. While that stays the case, purely theoretical, unfalsifiable models aren't much more than speculation right now. That doesn't mean it's not worth discussing (the philosophical questions related to multiverses as brought up by the OP are really interesting) but without any way to experimentally verify the models there's not much application of multiverse theory outside of philosophical questions.

Nilly said:

Yeah I'm going to need some semblance of a source on any of these claims.

While theorizing about multiverses can be interesting, and they certainly pose some interesting philosophical questions, I don't believe there is any evidence for the multiverse, nor has any falsifiable experiment been devised.

Click to expand...

You missed the center point of my post which was "evidence is coming through and a majority of theoretical physicists are leaning toward it being a fact. Science unlike the great falsehood called "religion" changes because it seeks proof though hard work, discussion and proving what were once theories to be facts. We do not know today what we will know tomorrow.

rhinefire said:

You missed the center point of my post which was "evidence is coming through and a majority of theoretical physicists are leaning toward it being a fact.

Click to expand...

Yeah and my point is that this center point is not true. Show me some of this evidence that you state is coming through? Also do you have some kind of source demonstrating that the majority of theoretical physicists are leaning towards it being fact?

If we don't hold science up to an acceptable level of rigor it becomes no better than religion.

rhinefire said:

Apparently it is becoming more clear that it is likely there are a multitude of universes so as this becomes more and more a reality there are natural questions. Adding to the possibility is what these universes probably consist of. Some may be vastly different even in the physics properties, some may be like ours and some may be an exact duplicate of ours. If you ponder this possibility does it impact you in any way in terms of God, the after life or your soul? To me it is a fantastic thing and hopefully they will prove it to beyond any doubt. To me, the greatest idea is one of different laws of physics and another that is an exact duplicate of ours. Listening to the explanations of this theory (what there is that I can understand) I cannot think of anything greater to ponder.

Click to expand...

At this point there is not more evidence for the multiverse than there are gods. So I would imagine that all this is meaningless to the believers in gods.

BTW there are multiple theories explaining a multiverse, not just one as you seem to be asserting. These theories are fun to get stoned and think about but they really have little to do with hard science even if some big names are proponents. But they are not all in agreement so everyone cant be right now can they?

I think the work being done regarding theories involving a multiverse is useful and will lead to some great discoveries but the outcome is still very open and should be treated as being open not stuffed shut with confirmation bias. It reminds me of the theist looking for proof of their god and they believe that they found it because they kept their faith. Is there a multiverse? No one knows that answer no matter how much they lean towards that conclusion. Will any discovery in science stop the faithful from believing in their gods? No. otherwise they wouldnt be faithful.

Well, I for one do not buy the Multiverse theory. There is no good reason to believe it to be true. All we've seen thus far is background radiation from supposedly our own universes' early days, but nothing else. Multiple universes' are not nothing, they are something, and I suspect unless they were all created at the same time in some cosmic, instant something from nothing scenario, inside some ether, or medium, then we would expect to account for it by now. Perhaps that is what dark matter, and dark energy are? Who knows, but like I said, there is no evidence to suggest there is anything out there other than our own universe.


Tim-

Hicup said:

Multiple universes' are not nothing, they are something, ... Perhaps that is what dark matter, and dark energy are? Who knows, but like I said, there is no evidence to suggest there is anything out there other than our own universe.

Click to expand...

That is a really smart guess.

And that the multiple universes might be connected with the dark matter and or the dark energy is very logical.


====================================

zyzygy said:

What special powers do you have that enable you to see these multiple universes?

Click to expand...

Actually I already said.

I called it as extra-curricular vision. :tink:

It is kind of the exact opposite of being spiritually blind.


===================================

doniston said:

The only difference is that I do not believe there is a "Person" God, but rather (think Star Wars) an unknown natural force that has created us. ( LET THE FORCE BE WITH YOU"

Click to expand...

I am very close to that same conclusion myself.

A bit more complicated but still going in the same way.

God simply can not be a person, even though God has great personality.


===================================

Nilly said:

Hypotheses should follow data. Not the other way around. Nobody believed in quantum mechanics until the data told us over and over again 'something strange is going on here'. It's as Asimov said, "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'". Preconceived notions are often more dangerous than skepticism.

Click to expand...

You are shut down and held back by not having the vision to see without the proof.

I see skepticism as being the most debilitation, and preconceived notions are the very best of seeds.

Nilly said:

That doesn't mean it's not worth discussing (the philosophical questions related to multiverses as brought up by the OP are really interesting) but without any way to experimentally verify the models there's not much application of multiverse theory outside of philosophical questions.

Click to expand...

The philosophical questions are the most interesting and most compelling.

Much the same as an atomic bomb, in that the philosophical questions are more important then the nuts-and-bolts of building the damned things.

JP Cusick said:

You are shut down and held back by not having the vision to see without the proof.

I see skepticism as being the most debilitation, and preconceived notions are the very best of seeds.

The philosophical questions are the most interesting and most compelling.

Much the same as an atomic bomb, in that the philosophical questions are more important then the nuts-and-bolts of building the damned things.

Click to expand...

I don't need proof, I just want evidence before it is claimed to be real. Evidence is the crux of the scientific method. And I agree, the philosophical questions are most interesting, but they become even more interesting when the theory actually has something backing it rather than it just being feasible. My position on this may seem petty to some people, but I would feel hypocritical not wanting evidence for a scientific claim, particularly seeing as I usually demand evidence in relation to other claims (gods, spirits, unicorns etc).

As for skepticism being debilitating, I can assure you that the scientific consensus there is very much in disagreement with you.