Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
116
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 10:54 am
DBP, is there another source than the daily mail? :cringe:
The difference, Chad, is that no one here so far as I know accepts the any of the various multiverse theories totally, without exception, or claim them to be inviolable in nature. They are merely (at least to me) cool hypotheses that might explain some of the anomalies we see in the cosmos.
Also, these theories are the result of interpreting observed phenomena. Your religion does the exact opposite. You start with a conclusion, and sift out all of the evidence that contradicts said conclusion, and then claim perfect revelation.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 3369
Threads: 120
Joined: January 19, 2015
Reputation:
30
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 11:02 am
Strange thread. What's this got to do with us? Has someone here championed alternate universes as fact? I don't think so. The multiverse idea has been around for a long time, mostly as speculation. It was definitely a fringe idea although recently it has become mainstream. It's still mostly hypothesis at this stage of the game. And you're wrong about there being no possibility of detecting them. I can't say whether or not the Planck data is actual evidence but M theory (Google it) predicts that gravity is not confined to the universe with the mass that generated it. So you're full of shit anyway.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein
Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 11:03 am
(October 16, 2015 at 10:54 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: DBP, is there another source than the daily mail? :cringe:
The difference, Chad, is that no one here so far as I know accepts the any of the various multiverse theories totally, without exception, or claim them to be inviolable in nature. They are merely (at least to me) cool hypotheses that might explain some of the anomalies we see in the cosmos.
Also, these theories are the result of interpreting observed phenomena. Your religion does the exact opposite. You start with a conclusion, and sift out all of the evidence that contradicts said conclusion, and then claim perfect revelation.
here you go.
http://www.space.com/25100-multiverse-co...waves.html
http://phys.org/news/2010-12-scientists-...erses.html
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
116
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 11:05 am
Awesome. 
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 3369
Threads: 120
Joined: January 19, 2015
Reputation:
30
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 11:06 am
downbeatplumb, that detection of gravity waves has been discredited.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein
Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 11:08 am
(October 16, 2015 at 11:06 am)AFTT47 Wrote: downbeatplumb, that detection of gravity waves has been discredited.
Bugger.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 2009
Threads: 2
Joined: October 8, 2012
Reputation:
26
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 11:53 am
(October 16, 2015 at 9:19 am)ChadWooters Wrote: By definition, the constants and physical laws that make our universe possible would not apply in another. In short, our version of physics would have no applicability to the 'natural' laws of an alternate universe. Really?
Where does it say another universe couldn't have the same physical properties as ours? What observations and tests have been done that say, "If another universe exists, it must have different properties than ours."?
Posts: 1635
Threads: 9
Joined: December 12, 2011
Reputation:
42
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 12:00 pm
It's not a theory, but a likely conclusion. What you're looking for is Lambda Cold Dark Matter model, which is where we're at. Numerous theories and other models got us there, such as the Standard Model and inflationary theory. When launching an attack, one should know what it is one is attacking, lest one look more ass than pompous. 
Posts: 30220
Threads: 116
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
158
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 12:01 pm
What's your point, Chad?
Posts: 13051
Threads: 66
Joined: February 7, 2011
Reputation:
92
RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 12:01 pm
(October 16, 2015 at 9:19 am)ChadWooters Wrote: ................(crickets)
Not only is there no empirically verifiable evidence for the multiverse, there could not ever be. By definition, the constants and physical laws that make our universe possible would not apply in another. In short, our version of physics would have no applicability to the 'natural' laws of an alternate universe. The multiverse is an unfalsifiable faith-based theory.
And just when the hell did you suddenly start caring about empirical, verifiable evidence? You'll prattle on and on about metaphysical universals and you have the balls to dismiss the multiverse based on a perceived lack of verifiable evidence? Suddenly you're a logical positivist when it comes to the multiverse?
I know it's hard to maintain consistency when you're trying to force the evidence to fit a pet conclusion, but even you should be able to recognize and hang your head in shame for such blatant intellectual dishonesty.
|
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
