RE: [asa] Four views (multiverse)

From: George Cooper <georgecooper@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Fri Dec 19 2008 - 13:37:52 EST

Bernie,

 

As far as I know, multiverses "theory" does not yet offer any testable
claim. None of these other universes are not observable even in principle,
though M-theory might have something to offer at least in principle.

 

Did your reading explain how they can claim scientific theory status for the
multiverse hypothesis? Tegmark claims his parallel universe does meet the
requirements, but his work seems only to infer other universes from quantum
evidence. I find this irony equal only to the hubris behind such a sizeable
leap. [I'm not a physicists, however, and I won't object if I'm wrong.]

 

What will be the next "theory" that takes us to the next level beyond
multiverses in theorizing of the great beyond?

 

If I were an atheist, I certainly would prefer the multiverses theories over
a monoverse. The more dice in hand, the greater the probability of getting
a combination that adds up to life.

 

Coope

 

 

 

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 10:08 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] Four views (multiverse)

 

Randy said-

"I confess I'm not a big fan of multiverses. They are imaginative and
philosophically challenging but most scientists I know are pragmatic
realists and deal with the universe as we see it."

 

Randy- I used to feel the same way- probably zero respect for multiverse
theory. However I recently got and read this book:

 

"Many worlds in one: the search for other universes" by Alex Vilenkin

 
<http://www.amazon.com/Many-Worlds-One-Search-Universes/dp/0809067226/ref=sr
_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229361747&sr=1-4>
http://www.amazon.com/Many-Worlds-One-Search-Universes/dp/0809067226/ref=sr_
1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229361747&sr=1-4

 

I have to say- I think I now have full respect for this hypothesis. I
certainly don't know if it is true or not (way over my head)- but it is
fascinating to realize that at one time we thought the Earth was the center
of the universe, then the sun, then we discovered the universe (size and
contents)- and now maybe there's multiverses. trippy.

 

The book was very interesting in discussing the anthropic principle and how
it would be related to multiverses, and also the idea of the quantum level
foam of the space-time fabric (how something may come from nothing). very
interesting ideas. The author is obviously very thoughtful. He even
mentions St. Augustine as a person with interesting cosmos insight.

 

.Bernie

 

  _____

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Randy Isaac
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 6:46 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Four views

 

I confess I'm not a big fan of multiverses. They are imaginative and
philosophically challenging but most scientists I know are pragmatic
realists and deal with the universe as we see it. My comments are in that
vein.

 

"atheists are willing to accept pretty much 'anything but God'". Perhaps you
have data that I'm not aware of. This isn't consistent with those I know.

 

"it seems odd to suggest TEs believe in God due entirely to their particular
faith." Don't we all?

 

Randy

 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Dec 19 13:41:36 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 19 2008 - 13:41:36 EST