How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Universe and Universes
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Universe and Universes

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


0 posted 05-29-2003 07:36 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?ch...EA5809EC5880000

Regardless of whether there really are alternate universes out there as this article points to, or even if it is true, I want to point out that it doesn't really matter if you describe the universe as one or multiple. Universe, on at least one description, is just everything there is so it's still a whole with many parts, it's just a whole lot bigger than we generally imagine.

So what's the big deal? Honestly, I don't know, but we do have some no-nonsense realists out there (and, let's be honest, these forums wouldn't be half as fun if they weren't around) who say things like, "There is a world and there is a way that it is." On the face of it, who would disagree with that? There's really nothing wrong with it. It's a perfectly useful description and as a working assumption it has helped us do many things.

But it is still nothing more than a description. If we change it to "There are worlds and there are there are ways in which they are" what really changes? Not much, except that it opens up the possibility of multiple descriptions for multiple worlds and, perhaps, multiple descriptions of singular worlds, and singular descriptions of multiple worlds.

The only problem I see is when words like 'just' ,'only','merely' slip into the conversation and we start ridiculing others who believe anything different from this one description. Here, we confuse two perfectly good descriptions with a right description and a wrong one. No one is denying that we can get things wrong and the people do get things wrong. It doesn't mean anything goes, it only means that there are more descriptions that are perfectly legitimate and that, maybe, we should be looking for more descriptions, not less.

The idea of alternate universes, multiple worlds etc. is often seen as a new, exotic and exciting idea, but historically, it's a frighteningly old idea. Most (Dare I say all?) cultures accept and never doubt, not just the possibility of other worlds, but the reality of them. We live in a world and we live in worlds and there is no contradiction there because we are talking about descriptions, not the world(s) in and of itself.

And how do you get out of, or why would you want to get out of, this ability to describe?

jbouder
Member Elite
since 09-18-99
Posts 2641
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash


1 posted 05-30-2003 09:51 AM       View Profile for jbouder   Email jbouder   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for jbouder

Brad:

This takes me back to my comic book days.  But why do I always feel as though I must read between the lines with you?  I think I understand your point.  When discussing the existence of a multi-verse vs. a unified, singular universe vs. something in-between (I have something like Monadology in mind here – the existence of an infinite number of possible universes with the "best of possible worlds" prevailing), it is more productive to focus on the merits of the theory posited than to attach value judgments (just, only, merely, etc.)  to any exceptions we take to the theory.  At least before we've taken the time to weigh the credibility of the theory on its merits.

Although, you do have to admit that Voltaire’s value judgments of Leibniz were pretty darn entertaining.   Seriously, all this assumes both positions are “perfectly legitimate” and, when speculating about something you cannot see or observe, how much you must assume to be true in order for the respective position to be plausible.

Jim

P.S. Isn’t “perfectly” a value judgment also?
Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


2 posted 06-02-2003 01:29 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

That link didn't work for me!
Guess I'll go check in with my alternate universe site.


Hey, belly button? are you open for business? I'm searching for some profound truth today.

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


3 posted 06-02-2003 01:40 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

It would appear Brad that the article that you linked to is gone.  I don't know what it said but, I think that the problem between Universe and Universes you pose isn't necessarily the way it's looked at by most physisists.

That is to say -- that space only exists in this universe.  Or, rather, normal space as we understand it -- in the three dimensions we can easily observe with coordinates and with the passage of time being the fourth.

The 'normal' space we understand is comprised of more matter than antimatter and has specific properties to the strong, weak, and electromagnetic interactions that are easily distinguishible.  

'H' space -- which is what lies 'between' (for lack of a better word) universes (so named after Higgs) makes no distinction between these forces -- they are all equal or non-existent.  It would appear that pumping enough energy into 'N' space could create a small region of 'H' space -- but -- it's important to distinguish between the two.

'N' space is created by 'boiling' 'H' space -- and other 'Universes' are other bubbles in the 'H' space sea -- but they don't exist at specific coordinates the way we understand it.

We're trapped in this universe anyway -- just as matter becomes trapped in the gravitational feild of the black hole -- and -- judging by the 'flatness' (the condition of the universe being ever expanding and teetering on the brink of collapse infinitely) it is also postulated that our universe is trapped on the surface of a black hole.

There could equally be other universes inside our normal space -- trapped on the surfaces of black holes inside our universe -- the Horton Hears a Who syndrome.

The greater 'sea' of 'H' space is sometimes referred to as the Mega-verse -- as Jim mentioned -- and beyond that?  But -- I'm thinking in Normal space/time dimensions -- a paradigm I'm trapped in -- so -- for now -- beyond that -- I propose the Meta-verse.

[This message has been edited by Local Rebel (06-02-2003 01:42 PM).]

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


4 posted 06-02-2003 01:45 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

One more thought --

It's nice to be trapped in this universe because if we could 'slide' into another one it might have more anti-matter than matter and we'd be annhilated -- or other properties might be more askew than that -- there's no place like home, there's no place like home, there's no place like home.
jbouder
Member Elite
since 09-18-99
Posts 2641
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash


5 posted 06-02-2003 03:23 PM       View Profile for jbouder   Email jbouder   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for jbouder

LR:

Try this one.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&articleID=000F1EDD-B48A-1E90-8EA5809E C5880000

So I guess what you are saying is that, in a way, we do live in the "best of possible worlds."  The best of possible worlds for us, at any rate.  I have to admit that I never considered that Leibniz could have been right.  I guess I shouldn't have read "Candide" first.  

Jim

[This message has been edited by jbouder (06-02-2003 03:24 PM).]

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


6 posted 06-03-2003 11:45 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Thanks Jim,

That worked a lot better.  I was previously unfamiliar with the 'Level 1' math.  My initial reaction is ROTFLMAO .

Pop science.  Ya gotta love it.

If it will make you feel any better about my religious stance I'll be agnostic about dopplegangers too.  heh.

[This message has been edited by Local Rebel (06-03-2003 11:46 PM).]

jbouder
Member Elite
since 09-18-99
Posts 2641
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash


7 posted 06-04-2003 08:41 AM       View Profile for jbouder   Email jbouder   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for jbouder

I don't know, LR.  A doppleganger could be useful.  I just need to find the alternate Jim who is the multi-millionaire, workaholic philanthropist.  Of course there is the problem of bringing him here from a gazillion light years away.  

Jim

[This message has been edited by jbouder (06-04-2003 10:19 AM).]

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


8 posted 06-06-2003 03:56 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Isn't it frightening that somewhere there may be a universe where I'm the president of the United States?

Or even one where Saddam Hussein actually had WMDs?  
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


9 posted 07-12-2012 03:28 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Of course we failed to consider the most compelling evidence of an alternate universe right here inside this one -- Fox News
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


10 posted 11-28-2012 08:10 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2



A problem with theoretical physicists is that just when they think they've got it, what they "think" is all they've got, and may have nothing to do with "it" at all. And then they use convoluted logic to "prove" what they already think to be so.

Sometimes it works out.  Einstein's notions of the integrity of time and space proved out.  String theory hasn't.  Makes for fun serious or pop discussion, though.

Or, one could just trip over a rock.

Jimbeaux

Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


11 posted 12-10-2012 05:38 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

According to the 'best intelligence available at this time' the WMD now in Syria came from Iraq. Imagine that.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Universe and Universes Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors