A Brief History of the Multi-universe

I rather suspect that the "there is a GOD who always was -- and the GOD created what we see and can infer exists" scenario has more appeal forl you.

Am I correct?

God controls universe(s)?
Frank, your theory works only if you accept the theory of the existence of God, which must be taken by faith.

Faith is not a credible basis for scientific theorums which, to be validated, must be proven beyond faith.

I am not a scholar, but I've been interested in the possibility of multiple universes for several years without reading anything about it in scientific articles.

BumbleBeeBoogie

A "Theory" is nothing more than an explanation of known facts...when and if the facts change, the theory would be expected to change. Therefore, any proposed "Theory" that is not supported by known facts is to be rejected. However, support for any one theory does not
automatically lead to a rejection of a second or even a third if those
theories are also supported by the facts.

Facts, not interpetations, are the basis for evaluation. An open and
curious mind and a regard for truth are still the basis for good science.
Media coverage and political support are not.

I have proposed on a number of occasions what I call the "Theory of the Congenial Universe" which states that; what ever cosmologists propose the Universe responds "ya we can do that". Cosmologists have unfortunately remained sadly unresponsive to the profound and ground breaking insight.

It's a common argument that the Universe is tuned "just so" for life to exist, and that any slight modification means that "life" would be impossible.

But this premise assumes that life as we know it is the only form of life that *can* exist. And I disagree with this assumption.

The life we see around us evolved in this Universe as conditions allowed, so it's not surprising at all that everything fits nicely. Other Universes with different rules would necessarily have life in them which fits that universe. And Universes which are sterile have no life in them to question the fact that they are not there.

The really interesting thing to realize is that life evolves in Universes (at least this one) at all. Is the evolution of life in a Universe pure chance, or is it inevitable?

In our universe at least, life not only can exist, but does exist. And that means that our Universe is itself, alive, in a very real sense. And we are its thoughts.

Reply to rosborne979
rosborne979, your well thought out response was wonderful and right on target. I especially like your last paragraph, even though it elevates Earth's humans to a high status I'm not sure we deserve, at least in today's crazy world.

"In our universe at least, life not only can exist, but does exist. And that means that our Universe is itself, alive, in a very real sense. And we are its thoughts."

-----BumbleBeeBoogie

Hi BumbleBee,

I'm not so sure we humans, as self aware beings, are alone in this universe. And even if we are, I don't think it makes us any more lofty in status.

The fact that consciousness exists at all, seems to speak volumes about the true nature of our Universe. A realization which seems to escape most people, many of whom think that science only reveals a bleak and meaningless reality. To me, nothing could be further from the truth.

Best Regards,

Do we know only what we notice?
The late Scottish psychiatrist, Ronald Laing, said, "The range of what we think and do is limited by what we fail to notice. And because we fail to notice that we fail to notice, there is little we can do to change, until we notice how failing to notice shapes our thoughts and deeds."

BumbleBeeBoogie

The view of multi-universe is not a theorem but an interpretation. It explains the world as well as a view that a single universe is created by god. But multi-universe could have been created by god, too.

reply to sat focusable; who or what created God?
sat-focusable, nice try, but who or what created God?

BumbleBeeBoogie..
God exists.
(It's the simplest answer.)

reply to satt-focusable
Satt-focusable, somehow I knew you were going to respond with that conversation closer. End of discussion with you, I guess?

BumbleBeeBoogie

I said god just exists. What would you like more?

Satt-focusable
Satt, do you mind if I call you "satt" for short since we're discussing God?

Your reply was short and to the point, for which I give you much credit. I assume it is based on your belief system. It wasn't very helpful to me, a non-believer, and really brings discussion to a screeching halt of my main posted topic re the multiverse. Why, because I find debates about the existence of God between believers and non-believers a useless and frustrating exercise.

BumbleBeeBoogie

BumbleBeeBoogie..
You asked,

".. who or what created God?"

I replied,

"God exists."

This dialogue is a logical one, not concerned with one's belief system.

Satt
Satt, you are quite correct, we both replied with the next logical response to each other's statement. But there is nowhere to go now that would continue in a logical manner. Why, because a discussion about God is not based on logic, but on faith. I personally find no productive reason to debate another's faith.

BumbleBeeBoogie

Topic here is more about logic than about faith.

An article (longish) on parallel universes:

SciAm

A variant on the multi universe which seems to me obvious, and very real, is the infinite universe.
Here the universe that we perceive is simply one cell of infinity, the others being like or unlike "cells" beyond our own, but filling the remainder of "everything" beyond our specific "this" with "otherthings", identical, or not.

If we look at the magnitudinal stratification of this universe we go from, as we interpret it, and with our current ability to decern at sub nano levels, the smallest subatomic particles through atoms, molecules, solids, constructs, and on, and on, and on, to planets, star systems, galaxies, and on to our entire known universe.
Would it not be foolish to assume this "Mandelbrot" like lattice would stop at the extreem of our meagre ability to observe, rather than continue to follow its serial makeup to unimagined levels of structure, and beyond to infinity (infinity, of course not being a point, but rather a lack of constraint quantifier).