(September 14, 2015 at 11:48 pm)Chuck Wrote: Now let's say our whole universe is truly infinite even while the part observable to us is not, and the laws of physics is not unique to specific regions of the universe.  Then somewhere in the infinite whole universe everything which is possible anywhere would not only occur somewhere, but occur an infinite number of times, spread throughout the infinite universe.

I've never understood this logic.

How does it follow that just because something is infinite, that a certain scenario must play out? That all possibilities must occur?

If a monkey is typing randomly on a typewriter for an infinite amount of time it is said he will eventually at some point write out the entire works of Shakespeare, in perfect order.

Why? Because it will go on for infinity? Well then surely you could apply the logic that infinite time must pass before it ever happens too, and therefore it will never happen because an infinite amount of time must pass before it does. How do you divide infinity? What is half of infinity?

Recent post on Facebook.

Quote:It is important to keep in mind that the multiverse view is not actually a theory, it is rather a consequence of our current understanding of theoretical physics.

`from http://www.sciencealert.com/the-parallel...-be-tested

It should be noted that scientists have found possible evidence of other bubbles in the CMB.

(September 15, 2015 at 9:14 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: It should be noted that scientists have found possible evidence of other bubbles in the CMB.

There would have to be other "universes" floating around other than our own after all.

(September 15, 2015 at 8:09 pm)Iroscato Wrote:

(September 15, 2015 at 6:37 pm)heatiosrs Wrote: Are you just stupid or trolling?
Reporting your post for taking the quote completely out of context when i was simply discussing if one theory contradicted the other. 

Stop trying to be funny, on my introduction and on here making junk posts in a sarcastic attempt to humor yourself.

Grow some fucking skin, kid.

I believe that term is used when someone is insulted by someone else, he's simply not taking anything I take seriously when trying to ask a serious question.
If he was directly trying to insult me i wouldn't give a damn because at least then I know his intentions.

(September 14, 2015 at 11:48 pm)Chuck Wrote: There is always the barrier imposed by the fact that speed of light, and age of universe, is finite.   Consequently there are continuous parts of an infinite and continuous universe that is forever beyond our reach or observation.   The boundary of what we can reach or observe is not a physical limit in the universe.  It is just a limit from behind which no information will ever come to us.  

Now let's say our whole universe is truly infinite even while the part observable to us is not, and the laws of physics is not unique to specific regions of the universe.  Then somewhere in the infinite whole universe everything which is possible anywhere would not only occur somewhere, but occur an infinite number of times, spread throughout the infinite universe.  The exact configuration of all elementary particles that makes up OUR entire observable universe is clearly possible, or it, and us, wouldn't be here.   This means IF the whole universe is infinite, there must also be an infinite number of parallel sub universes within it, each an exact replicate of the entire observable universe in which we live.   Further more, there would be a vastly larger, more infinite, number of regions which resemble ours to various degree, but which are not identical to ours. Hence parallel universes in and infinite continuous universe, without even invoking anything exotic like higher dimensions.

Seems like we need a sharper definition.  I so no reason why space must be defined in relation to our local big bang event.  If space is indeed infinite, there could be equivalents so remote that even as our own event accelerates ever faster and grows completely cold, still no part of it will ever intersect any part of any other big bang event.

On the other hand, it could be that sometimes such things do intersect, just as some galaxies collide.  There just doesn't seem to be any way to ever know, given our point of view.

(September 15, 2015 at 8:37 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(September 14, 2015 at 11:48 pm)Chuck Wrote: Now let's say our whole universe is truly infinite even while the part observable to us is not, and the laws of physics is not unique to specific regions of the universe.  Then somewhere in the infinite whole universe everything which is possible anywhere would not only occur somewhere, but occur an infinite number of times, spread throughout the infinite universe.

I've never understood this logic.

How does it follow that just because something is infinite, that a certain scenario must play out? That all possibilities must occur?

If a monkey is typing randomly on a typewriter for an infinite amount of time it is said he will eventually at some point write out the entire works of Shakespeare, in perfect order.

Why? Because it will go on for infinity? Well then surely you could apply the logic that infinite time must pass before it ever happens too, and therefore it will never happen because an infinite amount of time must pass before it does. How do you divide infinity? What is half of infinity?

Neither do I.  I don't think anything like this is at all likely.  This logic assumes that there is no inevitable structure to such things.  I don't believe what is possible in other big bang events is random.  Neither do I think every conceivable permutation must obtain.

(September 15, 2015 at 12:16 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(September 14, 2015 at 10:53 pm)heatiosrs Wrote: That's another topic for discussion, but most scientists assume that space is infinite,

Do they?

Quote:that's why i am confused on if the Multiverse theory would actually put the Infinite Space Theory(Not sure what it's called) in jeopardy.

There are different types of multiverse hypotheses, but if you are referring to the most commonly talked about one where in inflation, patches of space get randomly blown up and then drop out of inflation due to quantum fluctuations - in that one, those separate patches making up the parallel universes would be finite iirc.

Whether the whole is finite or not is probably undetermined as well.

Alex, do you think there is any conceivable way of ever gathering any evidence of what is beyond our own big band event?  It boggles my mind to imagine how anyone could ever reasonably infer what is beyond our observable universe based on what we can observe within it.

Simply put-
Space is infinite, the universe is not. The universe is a finite "structure" within space, often visualized as a bubble. Of course, we are currently only able to see a portion of our universe even with the most advanced technology (called the visible universe). The universe is much larger than we can see, and may ever be able to see. Then again, a hundred years ago the concept of other galaxies outside our own were not yet known, now we know about galactic clusters and billions of individual galaxies. Technology is moving so rapidly, things we may not see feasible could be common knowledge in a relatively short period of time.

As far as I am aware, in the theory of eternal inflation, there is nothing like a barrier to actually stop us from leaving our own universe and venturing into "open space" (in theory), similar to how there is no barrier to stop us leaving earth except our own technological limitations. Our current technology limits us from even getting close to leaving our universe though, we're just barely starting to venture off our own planet into our own solar system. Hypothetically speaking, if we DID leave our universe, there would of course be no guarantee (in fact it would be highly improbable) we would be able to exist in other universes, as the set of circumstances which set them into existence would be so vastly different than out own. They may be dictated by such fundamentally different laws of reality we wouldn't be able to travel to them. The really mind blowing shit about it is we may be part of a multiverse that is part of a multiverse-cluster that is part of an even bigger structure (similar to how our universe is made up of galactic superclusters that are made up of galactic clusters that are made up of galaxies that are made up of individual stars, some of which have local solar systems that might contain planets such as our own).

---

Here's a fairly simple visual representation:

And don't limit yourself to just distance in contemplating where other universe might be.

They might be infinitesimally small, and pervading our persons. If small enough, they're forever beyond or ability to study them, yet to the even tinier inhibits therein, they could perceive their space as larger than what we see.

Maybe they overlap us, with fundamental laws and physical constants different from our own, they might be forever undetectable, yet right under our noses.

Or they experience time at a blistering pace, their universes existing to quickly for us to note their births and lives and deaths.

There are many, many ways to hide a universe . . .