The Multiverse????

[Liminal]

Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Proceeds from a false assumption. The job of science isn't to disprove God, but rather to figure out how the universe functions. It's not the job of science to tell anyone they are following the wrong God, to prove God, that people are abusing kids by teaching them religion, or anything of the sort. If God is killed in the process because science discovers something that contradicts someone's holy book or doctrine, that's not science's fault. It's got nothing to do with Marxism, Socialism, Atheism, or any other -ism beyond Methodological Naturalism. That some scientists are Marxists, Socialists, Atheists, or some other -ist isn't a fault of science or the scientific findings, but rather it's just a fault in human beings.

Also, there is a difference between experimental science and theoretical science. The scientific method we all learned in 7th Grade is great, but isn't quite so cut and dried when actual cutting edge science and scientists are involved.

Please provide where I said it was "The job of science isn't to disprove God."


What I proved.....PROVED.....is that faux scientists value the same faith that religious folk have in God, for the multiverse.


And all of you God-haters went wild!

God, another subject you know nothing about.

Hmmm....let's see....you made a comment, and now you're running from it....


Wanna try again?

The only criticism you can come up with is the manner of presentation, cut and paste?

So....every single thing I posted is correct, huh?


Now....just to prove you aren't the imbecile that I believe you are, elucidate what, if any, problems you have with that manner of presentation.


Of course, you could simply change your avi to "The Imbecile"

Nothing you've posted has ever been correct. That's because it's always tainted with the stench of ideology.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Proceeds from a false assumption. The job of science isn't to disprove God, but rather to figure out how the universe functions. It's not the job of science to tell anyone they are following the wrong God, to prove God, that people are abusing kids by teaching them religion, or anything of the sort. If God is killed in the process because science discovers something that contradicts someone's holy book or doctrine, that's not science's fault. It's got nothing to do with Marxism, Socialism, Atheism, or any other -ism beyond Methodological Naturalism. That some scientists are Marxists, Socialists, Atheists, or some other -ist isn't a fault of science or the scientific findings, but rather it's just a fault in human beings.

Also, there is a difference between experimental science and theoretical science. The scientific method we all learned in 7th Grade is great, but isn't quite so cut and dried when actual cutting edge science and scientists are involved.

Please provide where I said it was "The job of science isn't to disprove God."


What I proved.....PROVED.....is that faux scientists value the same faith that religious folk have in God, for the multiverse.


And all of you God-haters went wild!

God, another subject you know nothing about.

Hmmm....let's see....you made a comment, and now you're running from it....


Wanna try again?

The only criticism you can come up with is the manner of presentation, cut and paste?

So....every single thing I posted is correct, huh?


Now....just to prove you aren't the imbecile that I believe you are, elucidate what, if any, problems you have with that manner of presentation.


Of course, you could simply change your avi to "The Imbecile"

Nothing you've posted has ever been correct. That's because it's always tainted with the stench of ideology.

Wasn't it fun how you posted some vague criticism of cut and paste, and I rammed it down your throat?

 

[Liminal]

Proceeds from a false assumption. The job of science isn't to disprove God, but rather to figure out how the universe functions. It's not the job of science to tell anyone they are following the wrong God, to prove God, that people are abusing kids by teaching them religion, or anything of the sort. If God is killed in the process because science discovers something that contradicts someone's holy book or doctrine, that's not science's fault. It's got nothing to do with Marxism, Socialism, Atheism, or any other -ism beyond Methodological Naturalism. That some scientists are Marxists, Socialists, Atheists, or some other -ist isn't a fault of science or the scientific findings, but rather it's just a fault in human beings.

Also, there is a difference between experimental science and theoretical science. The scientific method we all learned in 7th Grade is great, but isn't quite so cut and dried when actual cutting edge science and scientists are involved.

Please provide where I said it was "The job of science isn't to disprove God."


What I proved.....PROVED.....is that faux scientists value the same faith that religious folk have in God, for the multiverse.


And all of you God-haters went wild!

God, another subject you know nothing about.

Hmmm....let's see....you made a comment, and now you're running from it....


Wanna try again?

The only criticism you can come up with is the manner of presentation, cut and paste?

So....every single thing I posted is correct, huh?


Now....just to prove you aren't the imbecile that I believe you are, elucidate what, if any, problems you have with that manner of presentation.


Of course, you could simply change your avi to "The Imbecile"

Nothing you've posted has ever been correct. That's because it's always tainted with the stench of ideology.

Wasn't it fun how you posted some vague criticism of cut and paste, and I rammed it down your throat?

Is that what you did? I must have missed that part.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Please provide where I said it was "The job of science isn't to disprove God."


What I proved.....PROVED.....is that faux scientists value the same faith that religious folk have in God, for the multiverse.


And all of you God-haters went wild!

God, another subject you know nothing about.

Hmmm....let's see....you made a comment, and now you're running from it....


Wanna try again?

The only criticism you can come up with is the manner of presentation, cut and paste?

So....every single thing I posted is correct, huh?


Now....just to prove you aren't the imbecile that I believe you are, elucidate what, if any, problems you have with that manner of presentation.


Of course, you could simply change your avi to "The Imbecile"

Nothing you've posted has ever been correct. That's because it's always tainted with the stench of ideology.

Wasn't it fun how you posted some vague criticism of cut and paste, and I rammed it down your throat?

Is that what you did? I must have missed that part.

So....you're a liar, too?

 

[Steven_R]

Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Proceeds from a false assumption. The job of science isn't to disprove God, but rather to figure out how the universe functions. It's not the job of science to tell anyone they are following the wrong God, to prove God, that people are abusing kids by teaching them religion, or anything of the sort. If God is killed in the process because science discovers something that contradicts someone's holy book or doctrine, that's not science's fault. It's got nothing to do with Marxism, Socialism, Atheism, or any other -ism beyond Methodological Naturalism. That some scientists are Marxists, Socialists, Atheists, or some other -ist isn't a fault of science or the scientific findings, but rather it's just a fault in human beings.

Also, there is a difference between experimental science and theoretical science. The scientific method we all learned in 7th Grade is great, but isn't quite so cut and dried when actual cutting edge science and scientists are involved.

Please provide where I said it was "The job of science isn't to disprove God."


What I proved.....PROVED.....is that faux scientists value the same faith that religious folk have in God, for the multiverse.


And all of you God-haters went wild!

You've done nothing of the sort. Science in neutral; it doesn't have anything to say about God one way or another. Your lack of education and ignorance of the material make you think that the likes of Hawking and Krauss and Greene and every other theoretical scientist is some kind of faux-scientist because they aren't running experiments. That isn't their job. I know what you were told in Jr. High about the scientific method, but your missing the key point which is that theoretical scientists are just coming up with hypotheses based on the evidence at hand. The are leaving it up to the experimental scientists to come up with a way to test the hypotheses. Until then, or until a better idea comes along, that's the best we can do. It doesn't mean that the theoretical scientists are frauds; it means they are sticking to their particular specialty, which is doing a lot of complicated math and coming up with a hypothesis.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Proceeds from a false assumption. The job of science isn't to disprove God, but rather to figure out how the universe functions. It's not the job of science to tell anyone they are following the wrong God, to prove God, that people are abusing kids by teaching them religion, or anything of the sort. If God is killed in the process because science discovers something that contradicts someone's holy book or doctrine, that's not science's fault. It's got nothing to do with Marxism, Socialism, Atheism, or any other -ism beyond Methodological Naturalism. That some scientists are Marxists, Socialists, Atheists, or some other -ist isn't a fault of science or the scientific findings, but rather it's just a fault in human beings.

Also, there is a difference between experimental science and theoretical science. The scientific method we all learned in 7th Grade is great, but isn't quite so cut and dried when actual cutting edge science and scientists are involved.

Please provide where I said it was "The job of science isn't to disprove God."


What I proved.....PROVED.....is that faux scientists value the same faith that religious folk have in God, for the multiverse.


And all of you God-haters went wild!

You've done nothing of the sort. Science in neutral; it doesn't have anything to say about God one way or another. Your lack of education and ignorance of the material make you think that the likes of Hawking and Krauss and Greene and every other theoretical scientist is some kind of faux-scientist because they aren't running experiments. That isn't their job. I know what you were told in Jr. High about the scientific method, but your missing the key point which is that theoretical scientists are just coming up with hypotheses based on the evidence at hand. The are leaving it up to the experimental scientists to come up with a way to test the hypotheses. Until then, or until a better idea comes along, that's the best we can do. It doesn't mean that the theoretical scientists are frauds; it means they are sticking to their particular specialty, which is doing a lot of complicated math and coming up with a hypothesis.

Imagine......if you actually understood what science is, and what is is not.

We live in a secular age where dunces like you accept Leftist philosophy and call it science....and don't even realize it, and you, are being used to attack the basis of Western civilization.


Here, a part of your education that is sorely lacking, an explanation of science:


"I have imposed upon myself, as a law, never to advance but from what is known to what is unknown; never to form any conclusion which is not an immediate consequence necessarily flowing from observation and experiment; and always to arrange the fact, and the conclusions which are drawn from them, in such an order as shall render it most easy for beginners in the study of chemistry thoroughly to understand them."
Antoine Lavoisier, "The Elements of Chemistry," 1790 Antoine Lavoisier



In short, there is no such scientific conception known as 'the Multiverse."

None.

To accept such as science obviates the very basis of actual science.




Tell me.....does your diploma actually say "Fool"?

 

[Steven_R]

I know you never bothered to walk across campus to visit the Biology Department to ask about evolution, but would it be too much to ask you to walk across campus to the Physics Department and ask them to explain how Theoretical Physics work and just why theoretical scientists say the things they do?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I know you never bothered to walk across campus to visit the Biology Department to ask about evolution, but would it be too much to ask you to walk across campus to the Physics Department and ask them to explain how Theoretical Physics work and just why theoretical scientists say the things they do?

Trying to educate you is like trying to grip smoke.

I am certain that many of your teachers had the very same impression.

 

[Steven_R]

You don't like their conclusions so you think they don't do science the way you think it should be done based on your understanding of the scientific method. You simply don't know enough about the sciences to understand why you are wrong. It's not a crime to be ignorant, but you embrace it like it's some kind of virtue.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You don't like their conclusions so you think they don't do science the way you think it should be done based on your understanding of the scientific method. You simply don't know enough about the sciences to understand why you are wrong. It's not a crime to be ignorant, but you embrace it like it's some kind of virtue.

It's not science, you dope.

It's bloviation in order to receive a pay check.

It's morons like you who are quick to accept and call science, any conjecture ad absurdum.
The God Gene: How Faith Is Hardwired into Our Genes Paperback – September 13, 2005
by Dean H. Hamer

Zeroing in on the “Gay Gene”http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/41472/title/Zeroing-in-on-the--Gay-Gene-/

A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing is a book by physicist Lawrence M. Krauss






"You simply don't know enough about the sciences...."

The truth is that I'm somewhere between you and understand all there is to know about science.

 

[Steven_R]

 

[Liminal]

God, another subject you know nothing about.

Hmmm....let's see....you made a comment, and now you're running from it....


Wanna try again?

The only criticism you can come up with is the manner of presentation, cut and paste?

So....every single thing I posted is correct, huh?


Now....just to prove you aren't the imbecile that I believe you are, elucidate what, if any, problems you have with that manner of presentation.


Of course, you could simply change your avi to "The Imbecile"

Nothing you've posted has ever been correct. That's because it's always tainted with the stench of ideology.

Wasn't it fun how you posted some vague criticism of cut and paste, and I rammed it down your throat?

Is that what you did? I must have missed that part.

So....you're a liar, too?

I doubt you can even begin to distinguish between reality and fiction.

 

[Vikrant]

There are quite a few people who are using science to attain some sort of celebrity status. They have tendency of writing books and appearing in TV shows that are more appealing from the perspective of science fiction and therefor tend to draw a large audience who otherwise may not be interested in science. I would even put Hawking in that category. However, disrespecting guys like Edward Witten just because your religion compels you to do so is very sad.

Let us talk about serious science now - particularly string theory as that appears to be the topic of this thread. Both theory of relativity and quantum field theory have established themselves as well accepted theories that are supported by evidence. However, there is a gap between the two. As we know, theory of relativity is good at explaining things at large distances and speeds nearing that of light but it sucks at explaining things at quantum level. That is where quantum field theory comes into play. This leaves a gap between the two. That gap needs to be filled. This is where string theory comes in. String theory postulates that everything in our universe and I mean everything such as energy, matter, gravity, etc. is made of one dimensional vibrating string. Prior to string theory which came out in 1980s, our understanding was that quarks were the most basic building block. Prior to arrival of Edward Witten on the scene, there were five competing string theories. This was problem for the credibility of the theory. But in 1995, Edward Witten successfully demonstrated that all those five theories were simply special cases of one string theory which was called M-theory. M stands for membrane. Prior to M-theory, string theory postulated that our realities existed in 10 dimensions. M-theory adds one more dimension to this bringing the total dimensions to 11. So our universe is made of three dimensional membrane which is made of one dimensional vibrating string. There is no limit to these membranes aka universes. When we think of multiverse, we tend to think of multiple universes at vast distances. That is not always the case actually. There could be a membrane right next to you but you cannot reach it even if it is right next to you because it could be at a higher dimension than yours. So it is not the distance which is always separating us from other membranes (universes) but the dimensions as well. We are nothing but the prisoners to the dimensions in which we exist. For example, us humans are limited to four dimensions. But even today we know of particles that defy common sense. For example, bosons can exist in multiple places at the same time. Positrons can go back in time. Last but not least the curious behaviors of entangled particles seem crazy.

The same of kind of disrespect that some people are showing towards string theory and its contributors was shown towards Satyendra Nath Bose (Indian theoretical physicist) when he in 1920 proposed that there is a possibility of a particle which can exist in two places at the same time. This was a revolutionary idea as it violated Pauli's Exclusion Principle. He received a lot of ridicule for his idea till Einstein backed him. Now bosons are reality. No body disputes that.

You have reasons to be skeptical about M-theory. There is nothing wrong with that skepticism. However, you have to realize that science is about proposing ideas and deliberating on them. That is how we advance as a society.

Keep in mind, it may be hard for us to prove M-theory for now but with the advent of next generation particle smashers, we may be able to pickup on signatures of gravitons which is a prediction of M-theory (string theory).

 

[PoliticalChic]

There are quite a few people who are using science to attain some sort of celebrity status. They have tendency of writing books and appearing in TV shows that are more appealing from the perspective of science fiction and therefor tend to draw a large audience who otherwise may not be interested in science. I would even put Hawking in that category. However, disrespecting guys like Edward Witten just because your religion compels you to do so is very sad.

Let us talk about serious science now - particularly string theory as that appears to be the topic of this thread. Both theory of relativity and quantum field theory have established themselves as well accepted theories that are supported by evidence. However, there is a gap between the two. As we know, theory of relativity is good at explaining things at large distances and speeds nearing that of light but it sucks at explaining things at quantum level. That is where quantum field theory comes into play. This leaves a gap between the two. That gap needs to be filled. This is where string theory comes in. String theory postulates that everything in our universe and I mean everything such as energy, matter, gravity, etc. is made of one dimensional vibrating string. Prior to string theory which came out in 1980s, our understanding was that quarks were the most basic building block. Prior to arrival of Edward Witten on the scene, there were five competing string theories. This was problem for the credibility of the theory. But in 1995, Edward Witten successfully demonstrated that all those five theories were simply special cases of one string theory which was called M-theory. M stands for membrane. Prior to M-theory, string theory postulated that our realities existed in 10 dimensions. M-theory adds one more dimension to this bringing the total dimensions to 11. So our universe is made of three dimensional membrane which is made of one dimensional vibrating string. There is no limit to these membranes aka universes. When we think of multiverse, we tend to think of multiple universes at vast distances. That is not always the case actually. There could be a membrane right next to you but you cannot reach it even if it is right next to you because it could be at a higher dimension than yours. So it is not the distance which is always separating us from other membranes (universes) but the dimensions as well. We are nothing but the prisoners to the dimensions in which we exist. For example, us humans are limited to four dimensions. But even today we know of particles that defy common sense. For example, bosons can exist in multiple places at the same time. Positrons can go back in time. Last but not least the curious behaviors of entangled particles seem crazy.

The same of kind of disrespect that some people are showing towards string theory and its contributors was shown towards Satyendra Nath Bose (Indian theoretical physicist) when he in 1920 proposed that there is a possibility of a particle which can exist in two places at the same time. This was a revolutionary idea as it violated Pauli's Exclusion Principle. He received a lot of ridicule for his idea till Einstein backed him. Now bosons are reality. No body disputes that.

You have reasons to be skeptical about M-theory. There is nothing wrong with that skepticism. However, you have to realize that science is about proposing ideas and deliberating on them. That is how we advance as a society.

Keep in mind, it may be hard for us to prove M-theory for now but with the advent of next generation particle smashers, we may be able to pickup on signatures of gravitons which is a prediction of M-theory (string theory).

"There is nothing wrong with that skepticism. However, you have to realize that science is about proposing ideas and deliberating on them. That is how we advance as a society."

You left off "....no matter how absurd."




Hmmm......can't seem to find any mention of the multiverse theory......

 

[Old Rocks]

Can't find any mention of multiverse theory?

AOL Search

682,000 entries.

 

[sealybobo]

1. What the heck has happened to science??

I mean real science, the kind that is based on testable ideas, with real data, reproducible experimental results....i.e., the vaunted Scientific Method?


Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Whatever comes out of the mouths.....computers.....of scientists is given the same acceptance as was once attributed to the utterances of priests.


You know, there are more working 'scientists' today than the total of all of 'em in earlier times....so, perhaps the glut, the overabundance, has done to intelligent exploration just as the government's working the monetary printing presses overtime has done to the value of money.

Science today suffers from inflation.


How else to explain the nonsense that passes for science today?





2. Case in point: at one time, science endeavored to discover the laws that explain our world, our universe, and how it came into existence. Science, today, seems content to accept every crackpot view with a thoughtful look and sincere stroking of one's chin, as though it actually made sense.



a. "The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them."
Multiverse - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



3. Brian Greene, "an American theoretical physicist and string theorist. He has been a professor at Columbia University since 1996 and chairman of the World Science Festival since co-founding it in 2008. (Brian Greene - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

"The Hidden Reality is a book by Brian Greene published in 2011 which explores the concept of the multiverse and the possibility of parallel universes. It has been nominated for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books for 2012.
(The Hidden Reality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

a. From an Amazon review of the book:
"...on the state of post-relativistic physics and cosmology as it is currently accepted by the majority of the academic physics community.
That is just the problem. None of string theory may be true at all. There has been no experimental verification of any of the elements of mathematically based string theory after 30 years or so of work, and, in fact, the theory may not even be "falsifiable." That is, it appears not to be subject to the rigors of the experimental scientific method, although the string theorists hope that with higher energy colliders and the like it may, someday, be testable."
Amazon.com Customer Reviews The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos




4. Science today.
Well, OK....'scientists' have to make a living, too. But there are dunces who not only accept this nonsense, but they try to use this kind of ordure as an attack on religion. You can see an interview with Greene about this book, here: Book Discussion Hidden Reality Video C-SPAN.org

Asked to elaborate about the multiverse theory, or about any experimental proof, the professor would say "the math tells us so, and I believe the math." Faith in a new religion.


a. Dr. Berlinski points out the absurdity of using the new religion of 'science' in hypothetical mathematics, and using it to attack religion:

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter five.




So.....how many scientists can dance on the head of a pin??

The multiverse is just one possible and plausable alternative possibility of answering questions we've always asked. An alternative to the must be god answer. Does it threaten your beliefs?

I suggest even if a multiverse wouldnt change your beliefs just like finding out we aren't the center of the universe didn't.

 

[Vikrant]

It takes incredible amount of arrogance to allude that the idea of multiverse is somehow more abusrd than the premise of this thread. If your religion is so constrictive that it is choking your creativity then may be it is time to shop for a new religion. Choking your mind is no way to live your life.

The idea of multiverse did not arise from vacuum. It has history. It started with Alan Guth proposing the idea of inflationary universe which was verified through astronomical observations later.

Russian scientist Alex Vilenkin took it one step further by suggesting that the inflation has to come to rest at some point and that it cannot come to rest at once. So we have places where inflation is still taking place. He coined the term eternal inflationary universe aka multiverse. Unfortunately Alex Vilenkin did not receive much support till string theory came along.

As a matter of fact, the book on multiverse would have probably closed if it was not for the arrival of string theory and making the prediction for multiverse. String theory especially in the form of M-theory is solid. It explains workings of our universe in detail and supports it through mathematics. Just like any other theory, it makes some fundamental assumptions and makes predictions. In less than 100 years or so, we will know whether those predictions are valid or not.

In defense of multiverse though, it is supported by three independent fields: inflationary universe (verified by observation), dark energy (verified by observation) and last but not least the M-theory (string theory). The idea of multiverse is gaining traction and to quote Andrei Linde, "Genie is out of the bottle."

 

[PoliticalChic]

It takes incredible amount of arrogance to allude that the idea of multiverse is somehow more abusrd than the premise of this thread. If your religion is so constrictive that it is choking your creativity then may be it is time to shop for a new religion. Choking your mind is no way to live your life.

The idea of multiverse did not arise from vacuum. It has history. It started with Alan Guth proposing the idea of inflationary universe which was verified through astronomical observations later.

Russian scientist Alex Vilenkin took it one step further by suggesting that the inflation has to come to rest at some point and that it cannot come to rest at once. So we have places where inflation is still taking place. He coined the term eternal inflationary universe aka multiverse. Unfortunately Alex Vilenkin did not receive much support till string theory came along.

As a matter of fact, the book on multiverse would have probably closed if it was not for the arrival of string theory and making the prediction for multiverse. String theory especially in the form of M-theory is solid. It explains workings of our universe in detail and supports it through mathematics. Just like any other theory, it makes some fundamental assumptions and makes predictions. In less than 100 years or so, we will know whether those predictions are valid or not.

In defense of multiverse though, it is supported by three independent fields: inflationary universe (verified by observation), dark energy (verified by observation) and last but not least the M-theory (string theory). The idea of multiverse is gaining traction and to quote Andrei Linde, "Genie is out of the bottle."

There are morons who will believe anything.....ANYTHING......and claim it to be 'science.'

Raise your paw.


Did you just quote 'Russian scientist Alex Vilenkin'?????


This guy claims that the universe came from nothing.


Nothing!!!!



Another 'scientific' theory you embrace?????



You guys......all charter members of "Imbeciles United"

 

[Vikrant]

It takes incredible amount of arrogance to allude that the idea of multiverse is somehow more abusrd than the premise of this thread. If your religion is so constrictive that it is choking your creativity then may be it is time to shop for a new religion. Choking your mind is no way to live your life.

The idea of multiverse did not arise from vacuum. It has history. It started with Alan Guth proposing the idea of inflationary universe which was verified through astronomical observations later.

Russian scientist Alex Vilenkin took it one step further by suggesting that the inflation has to come to rest at some point and that it cannot come to rest at once. So we have places where inflation is still taking place. He coined the term eternal inflationary universe aka multiverse. Unfortunately Alex Vilenkin did not receive much support till string theory came along.

As a matter of fact, the book on multiverse would have probably closed if it was not for the arrival of string theory and making the prediction for multiverse. String theory especially in the form of M-theory is solid. It explains workings of our universe in detail and supports it through mathematics. Just like any other theory, it makes some fundamental assumptions and makes predictions. In less than 100 years or so, we will know whether those predictions are valid or not.

In defense of multiverse though, it is supported by three independent fields: inflationary universe (verified by observation), dark energy (verified by observation) and last but not least the M-theory (string theory). The idea of multiverse is gaining traction and to quote Andrei Linde, "Genie is out of the bottle."

There are morons who will believe anything.....ANYTHING......and claim it to be 'science.'

Raise your paw.


Did you just quote 'Russian scientist Alex Vilenkin'?????


This guy claims that the universe came from nothing.


Nothing!!!!



Another 'scientific' theory you embrace?????



You guys......all charter members of "Imbeciles United"

Vilenkin's toenail is smarter than your brain. I do not think you are capable of understanding the work of Vilekin or anyone. You did not even understand my posts

There is a pattern in your replies. You just desperately twist people's posts to make it sound like as if you are making a rebuttal. It is your thread which is product of an imbecile mind; it does not even belong in Science & Technology section.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It takes incredible amount of arrogance to allude that the idea of multiverse is somehow more abusrd than the premise of this thread. If your religion is so constrictive that it is choking your creativity then may be it is time to shop for a new religion. Choking your mind is no way to live your life.

The idea of multiverse did not arise from vacuum. It has history. It started with Alan Guth proposing the idea of inflationary universe which was verified through astronomical observations later.

Russian scientist Alex Vilenkin took it one step further by suggesting that the inflation has to come to rest at some point and that it cannot come to rest at once. So we have places where inflation is still taking place. He coined the term eternal inflationary universe aka multiverse. Unfortunately Alex Vilenkin did not receive much support till string theory came along.

As a matter of fact, the book on multiverse would have probably closed if it was not for the arrival of string theory and making the prediction for multiverse. String theory especially in the form of M-theory is solid. It explains workings of our universe in detail and supports it through mathematics. Just like any other theory, it makes some fundamental assumptions and makes predictions. In less than 100 years or so, we will know whether those predictions are valid or not.

In defense of multiverse though, it is supported by three independent fields: inflationary universe (verified by observation), dark energy (verified by observation) and last but not least the M-theory (string theory). The idea of multiverse is gaining traction and to quote Andrei Linde, "Genie is out of the bottle."

There are morons who will believe anything.....ANYTHING......and claim it to be 'science.'

Raise your paw.


Did you just quote 'Russian scientist Alex Vilenkin'?????


This guy claims that the universe came from nothing.


Nothing!!!!



Another 'scientific' theory you embrace?????



You guys......all charter members of "Imbeciles United"

Vilenkin's toenail is smarter than your brain. I do not think you are capable of understanding the work of Vilekin or anyone. You did not even understand my posts

There is a pattern in your replies. You just desperately twist people's posts to make it sound like as if you are making a rebuttal. It is your thread which is product of an imbecile mind; it does not even belong in Science & Technology section.

I just proved I am familiar with his, and Krauss' work, you moron.


Let's cut to the chase: which is based on faith?

a. the multiverse theory
b. the universe from nothing
c. any religious doctrine

The proof of everything that I've posted will be in the fact that you will not answer the above honestly.



I detect, in your post, the hostility that is always the result of suddenly realizing that your entire worldview has been based on lies and fabrications.


Did you leave the stove on? Cause you just got burned.