RE: Empirical Evidence for Multiverse
October 16, 2015 at 2:27 pm
(This post was last modified: October 16, 2015 at 2:28 pm by Whateverist.)
(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.
What makes it faith based? We're not counting on it for anything. We don't try to supplicate it with sacrifices and promises. The multiverse is about following ideas to the limits of our ability. It is simply the most reasonable hypothesis that I personally can think of. For those of us dissatisfied with the idea that everything is but a passing whim of a magic genie, it provides provisional closure.
But you are right, as with god belief, it is not falsifiable. Of course an unavailability of empirical evidence is precisely what the theory would predict (I think). That makes it different than god belief since, according to your sacred records, God can and has made Himself known to man in the past. Unlike God, the multiverse isn't being coy, it is simply a structure -if it exists at all- that is at too great a scale to permit our detection. That is simply a statement of our own situation perceptually.
A multiverse is the best frame I can think of for placing what we know of the universe about us. The alternative is what? To imagine an end of space, a beginning and end of time? Intellectually those things bother me.
