The Philosophical implications of Multiverse Theory?

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

True.

Also, you can have no evidence for it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You have no idea how I view the bible.

In case you missed it you tipped your hand.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is legitimate in that it offers a valid explanation for our existence.

You have claimed this at least twice now but have not offered up one bit of evidence.

The "It's Magic" argument is your argument. I think the historical and experiential evidence for God's existence makes my side of the argument much more legitimate.

What "historical and experiential evidence for God"? And relying on a god is equivalent to relying on magic. "Magic" is still your argument.

The universe is a system for conveying information. A system has a programmer.

No, this is simply the wathcmaker fallacy.

 

[Thursday]

Also, you can have no evidence for it.

Experience is evidence, albeit inconclusive.

Also, design is evidence.

 

[Thursday]

No, this is simply the wathcmaker fallacy.

It is not a fallacy. A watch does not make itself.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

It is legitimate in that it offers a valid explanation for our existence.

In what sense is it a 'valid' explanation?

The "It's Magic" argument is your argument.

No, it is just an arbitrary example of something as informative and explanatory as "God did it".

I think the historical and experiential evidence for God's existence makes my side of the argument much more legitimate.

If God is supposed to be 'outside' the universe, then - as we have already said - it is inaccessible, which means there can be no evidence for its existence, historical or experiential.

If you're saying that a lot of people have believed that God exists and have believed they have experienced God, that's another matter. Lots of people have believed a lot of things through history that have been shown to be incorrect or that they cannot justify, including thousands of different gods. Believing something that is by definition unknowable and without evidence is explicitly irrational, but of a kind with other such beliefs.

The universe is a system for conveying information.

What makes you think so? what information? from where to where?

A system has a programmer.

Only if you define 'system' as 'something programmed'. A system is just a set of things that interact within some boundary, or that together form a whole.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is not a fallacy. A watch does not make itself.

LOL!! The universe is not a watch.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Experience is evidence, albeit inconclusive.

Also, design is evidence.

What "design"? You may be quoting someone out of context. Life may have the appearance of design.

Did you notice the qualifier in that sentence? It means that life is not designed when one looks at it more deeply.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Experience is evidence, albeit inconclusive.

You can't have experience of what is outside the universe. Experience consists of perception of events, and perceivable events occur within the universe - as we already agreed. Perception is often mistaken, and it's common to think you've experienced things that never really happened. Many people make a living out of it.

Also, design is evidence.

Evidence of what though? There are no objective criteria for design, and no unambiguous definition. It's evidence only of a subjective judgement.

For example, I'm happy to say that nature 'designs' snowflakes, river deltas, planets, and galaxies, etc., and 'designs' creatures through the process of Evolution by Natural Selection, because I think of design in terms of a process that produces structure with symmetry and organization. Some others feel that 'design' should be reserved for intentionally produced artifacts; I think that's an artificial distinction (pardon the pun).

So, no; design is only evidence of what you prefer to call 'designed'.

 

[Aryeh]

You are correct in your first statement.

I could sometimes see the future while fully awake (perhaps, I'm a prophet or something else, who knows...).

At some point, I decided to experiment with trying to alter the events I saw in the future.

Here's what happened. The course of action I took whether I think it would alter the future event, actually led to it!

Here's another thing, I could actually send a little amount of information to my past self. It has led to an interesting "time-looping" event wherein, I received a message from my future self and then when the same time approached, I sent the exact same message back to my past self....even if I never planned to.

The message that hit me is this: Prophet Jonah in all outcomes would have been eaten by a big fish and went to Nineveh.....Even if somehow, you invented a time machine and decides to mess up history - even this is the only one possible outcome and nothing else. Someone's going to travel to the past and mess up history and it is inevitable.

That is because everything that will happen has already happened.

Multiverse theory is compelling, but like a lot of TF, it depends a lot on how a particular function evolves over space AND time. Time... is a very deceptive entity. It is virtual. It limits our understanding of reconciling the past, present and future.

I think various theories, including MVT, are born out of trying to explain things around the concept of time as we known it.

You can sti see the future, do everything you can do prevent it, and them end up doing the same thing. That is because the "timelines" of everyone has fixed boundary conditions for any "segment" of life you choose.

The end points are fixed.

So, this is why string theory is so fascinating, and attractive, because we can model the evolution of time as a modified wave equation with at least one set of boundary conditions, and even initial conditions. It makes sense (but, it is still highly theoretical.)

But the "timelines" are not your typical "frictionless, massless, extremely thin, non-conducting, chargless, one-dimensional..." lines in n-dimensions.

You can make loops in your timeline, your timeline can squiggle, you can even have a well-defined expression for the shape of your timeline - like A(t, x, x')sin(k•x + wt) + f(x).

The certainty in your timeline comes from the segment you choose, and its endpoints (boundary conditions.) In other words, expectation values in position, energy, momentum and time. QM has already tackled the elegance of this problem, but time is still treated as a real dimension. Time is a phase - even a pseudovector.

Your timeline can look like Brownian Motion because of your actions (with or without knowledge of the endpoints,) but you will always end up at the same fixed endpoints (the happening.) You can see that as the segment get smaller and smaller (the interval of time chosen,) the closer "beginning" becomes "end". A singularity collapse.

Theoretically, you can start at the smallest "time segment interval dt," and take the [time]line integral slowly (each iteration as a dt,) you get a situation like a "prophet" accurately telling events, oracles, or even the omniscience of God Himself (if your "segment" is literally beginning and end.) For entities like prophets and angels, they are only given/choose a segment of creation that is very small. This is also why prophets for example, fan accurately predict future events, but perhaps cannot predict they would trip over a log. Their segment of information did not include that immediate future in the boundary.

 

[DennisTate]

That is because everything that will happen has already happened.

Multiverse theory is compelling, but like a lot of TF, it depends a lot on how a particular function evolves over space AND time. Time... is a very deceptive entity. It is virtual. It limits our understanding of reconciling the past, present and future.

I think various theories, including MVT, are born out of trying to explain things around the concept of time as we known it.

You can sti see the future, do everything you can do prevent it, and them end up doing the same thing. That is because the "timelines" of everyone has fixed boundary conditions for any "segment" of life you choose.

The end points are fixed.

So, this is why string theory is so fascinating, and attractive, because we can model the evolution of time as a modified wave equation with at least one set of boundary conditions, and even initial conditions. It makes sense (but, it is still highly theoretical.)

But the "timelines" are not your typical "frictionless, massless, extremely thin, non-conducting, chargless, one-dimensional..." lines in n-dimensions.

You can make loops in your timeline, your timeline can squiggle, you can even have a well-defined expression for the shape of your timeline - like A(t, x, x')sin(k•x + wt) + f(x).

The certainty in your timeline comes from the segment you choose, and its endpoints (boundary conditions.) In other words, expectation values in position, energy, momentum and time. QM has already tackled the elegance of this problem, but time is still treated as a real dimension. Time is a phase - even a pseudovector.

Your timeline can look like Brownian Motion because of your actions (with or without knowledge of the endpoints,) but you will always end up at the same fixed endpoints (the happening.) You can see that as the segment get smaller and smaller (the interval of time chosen,) the closer "beginning" becomes "end". A singularity collapse.

Theoretically, you can start at the smallest "time segment interval dt," and take the [time]line integral slowly (each iteration as a dt,) you get a situation like a "prophet" accurately telling events, oracles, or even the omniscience of God Himself (if your "segment" is literally beginning and end.) For entities like prophets and angels, they are only given/choose a segment of creation that is very small. This is also why prophets for example, fan accurately predict future events, but perhaps cannot predict they would trip over a log. Their segment of information did not include that immediate future in the boundary.

Or..... .perhaps time is like a vehicle.....
designed to assist us humans... .and angels to rise up
out of bad attitudes.......

and perhaps... although certain major trends are planned to go in a certain way by
a certain time......(for example the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on all flesh)......

still we have been given genuine freedom of choice to have at least a somewhat different
time line based on the choices that we make........

Former Atheist and near death experiencer Howard Storm:

They replied, "We want you to do what you want to do. That means making choices and there isn't necessarily any right choice. There are a spectrum of possibilities, and you should make the best choice you can from those possibilities. If you do that, we will be there helping you." (Howard Storm, near-death .com)

 

[DennisTate]

Hate to sound hyper-technical but I don't believe "multiverse" even rises to the level of a theory; it's an idea, a speculation. And quantum mechanics which is much more solid, with aspects of it proven experimentally, is still open to over a dozen philosophical interpretations, some of which include the idea of multiverse. So it's hard to say at this point anyway.

I am a total amateur on the subject... but one of my online friends has
written what I regard as a brilliant article on this topic.

Graham P.:

Hidden Un-Realities

Hidden Un-Realities

......

We sometimes hear that "Time is an illusion" or much of what we take for granted such as the world being physical is more illusion than real. Whether real or not our world seems to be underpinned by a hidden reality that includes imaginary numbers such as the square root of negative one, and/or extra hidden "rolled up" dimensions. For some such ideas are too crazy to consider. Like Roger Penrose we may need to propose impossible things such as his Penrose Triangle to find a last piece to finish the puzzle. Whether underpinned by simple or complex rules our world is very strange......" (Graham P.)

I personally prefer to think of time...... as an invention.....
much like a car, or canoe, or 747 or yacht.......
designed by an Intelligence / Intelligences.... composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy.... who
invented time......
in order to assist others.......
humans, angels, perhaps aliens of some form.........
even perhaps fallen angels......
to progress spiritually and philosophically from point A to point B... and on and on and on... to higher and higher levels of wisdom, empathy, love, understanding, compassion for others.......

especially others that they might tend to define as "inferior."

 

[Chriliman]

I am a total amateur on the subject... but one of my online friends has
written what I regard as a brilliant article on this topic.

Graham P.:

Hidden Un-Realities

Hidden Un-Realities

......


I personally prefer to think of time...... as an invention.....
much like a car, or canoe, or 747 or yacht.......
designed by an Intelligence / Intelligences.... composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy.... who
invented time......
in order to assist others.......
humans, angels, perhaps aliens of some form.........
even perhaps fallen angels......
to progress spiritually and philosophically from point A to point B... and on and on and on... to higher and higher levels of wisdom, empathy, love, understanding, compassion for others.......

especially others that they might tend to define as "inferior."

It may be more logical to think of time as we humans experience it as an effect of some higher level of experience of reality that is inaccessible to us at this time. This higher level of experience would be what God experiences and it's through His experience of reality that time as we know it becomes an experience that we can actually have as humans.

IOW, time as we experiences it is an effect of God's experience of reality.

It's illogical to think of time as an invention in the sense that at one point there was no time, but then it was invented and now there is time - logically one can't invent anything without first having time to invent it.

It may be better stated that God intended us to experience time in the way we do for a specific reason.

 

[Benji Bear]

The above youtube by Lee Smolin discusses the problem of who or what set the initial conditions of our universe. He states that the conditions are highly tuned. He suggests that time is real and hints that free will may be real. I understand Lee smolin believes that our universe's initial states evolved before our spacetime or Big Bang. He suggested our universe is a organism born from the interaction of two parents. This idea requires many universes. You may need to read his book "Time Reborn" for whether he still believes in many universe If t evolved organism theory of universes is true we have the strong possibility that such organisms are alive (with minds and feelings) like humans, cats or plants.


Whether we believe in a living universe or a manipulating game master we have something a little like the religious idea of a creating God. But we need to be careful that we do not assume because some aspects of the idea of God seems likely that we assume all beliefs of God are true. In Science we look to evidence to disprove old ideas and look for new ones that fit what we see. Different individuals and different Faiths sometimes have slightly different ideas of God.

My friend Graham's main concern with Christianity is the claim that it is the only path to God. In his opinion Science points towards a God who is largely hidden. Whether this is due to disinterest or giving us room to grow or some other reason is unsure. In either case it is certain that we are very blessed to have been given such a rich planet to live on and a universe so finely tuned to our needs. God or Nature has given all we need, sadly we may wind up messing up our Eden and turning it into a Hell on Earth.

Lee Smolin says mathematical objects are timeless and there fore can not capture time.

 

[morse86]

Once again we got people reading "extra biblical nonsense" written by worldly authors. How about we stick to the bible instead?

The word of God mentions nothing about a multiverse....in fact, he created everything ONCE and it was very good. That is what the word of God says, we don't need additional commentary nonsense by worldly authors and worldly books.

No one has seen a multiverse, it's a hoax. So what if they have mathematics to support it? Mathematics does not describe reality. When mathematics disconnect from reality, you have nonsense.

 

[DennisTate]

Once again we got people reading "extra biblical nonsense" written by worldly authors. How about we stick to the bible instead?

The word of God mentions nothing about a multiverse....in fact, he created everything ONCE and it was very good. That is what the word of God says, we don't need additional commentary nonsense by worldly authors and worldly books.

No one has seen a multiverse, it's a hoax. So what if they have mathematics to support it? Mathematics does not describe reality. When mathematics disconnect from reality, you have nonsense.

The basic concept behind Multiverse Theory is based firmly on scriptures.....

1Kings 8:47

"Yet if they shall bethink themselves in the land whither they were carried captives, and repent, and make supplication unto thee in the land of them that carried them captives, saying, We have sinned, and have done perversely, we have committed wickedness;

And so return unto thee with all their heart, and with all their soul, in the land of their enemies, which led them away captive, and pray unto thee toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, the city which thou hast chosen, and the house which I have built for thy name:

Then hear thou their prayer and their supplication in heaven thy dwelling place, and maintain their cause,

And forgive thy people that have sinned against thee, and all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed against thee, and give them compassion before them who carried them captive, that they may have compassion on them:

For they be thy people, and thine inheritance, which thou broughtest forth out of Egypt, from the midst of the furnace of iron:"

That thine eyes may be open unto the supplication of thy servant, and unto the supplication of thy people Israel, to hearken unto them in all that they call for unto thee." (King Solomon)

Multiverse Theory is founded on Messiah Yeshua - Jesus and the Ancient of Days the Father and the Ancient of Days the Holy Spirit being free to give human being genuine
freedom of choice........
that is backed up by unlimited technological capability.

Genesis 18:14

"Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son."

 

[DennisTate]

Experience is evidence, albeit inconclusive.

Also, design is evidence.

Near death experiencer Dannion Brinkley,
during his NDE in 1975 was shown about 117 events from the future.....
nearly a hundred of them have already taken place but.....
in our time line many of the events shown to Dannion may actually
have already occurred in another time line..... example of Multiverse.....

Our time line may be one that has been reinitiated from not too long after Dannion
wrote his book.....
and our time line may have been given a significantly higher outpouring of the
Holy Spirit so that so many of the worst events shown to Dannion have been delayed,
and delayed, and delayed.......

What he wrote about the fulfillment of the mark of the beast in chapter 5 of
"Saved By The Light" is well worth researching.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The basic concept behind Multiverse Theory is based firmly on scriptures...

No. Multiverse theory is firmly based on physics and mathematics (with a little philosophy).

It may well be that scriptures contain or can be interpreted as containing descriptions consistent with a multiverse (although you'll have to explain how what you quoted can be interpreted that way), but multiverse theory does not derive from that. Correlation (if present) does not imply causation.

I'd be interested to know which version of the multiverse you think the scriptures are consistent with.

 

[Radrook]

An online friend of mine happens to be a theoretical physicist and he has made me wonder if Ezekiel chapter 37 happens again and again and again and again as The G-d of Abraham, the Creator of heaven and earth, replicates a moment in what we think of as the past...… and spins off a new time line?

The implications of this are pretty heavy!

For example I recently read chapter 5 of "Saved By The Light" again by Dannion Brinkley. He had been shown a future where the major events of the Book of Revelation were fulfilled....... but...… was he shown the most recent time line that had already occurred..... and are we now in a new time line where our choices and our prayers can positively alter the future????

The idea of an entity mechanically spinning off multiple timelines brings into serious question the motive why such an entity would be eternally engaging in such a repetitive activity. For example, why would he not be satisfied with just one timeline? What benefits are there for mankind and for him in creating all these timelines?

 

[Radrook]

The multiverse theory might be viewed as just clever a way of evading the compelling religious issues which our universe's fine tuning forces us to contemplate.