Empirical Evidence for Multiverse

[Alex K]

If our physical laws include the multiverse theory, then the physics in the other universes is of course described by our physical laws. Or what am I missing?

[Alex K]

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."?

They don't have to, but in some popular speculative scenarios (string landscape) they do because the physical constants etc. are randomly selected in inflation. This is a nice hypothetical framework which explicitely shows how anthropic selection of physical laws could work. Now guess why theists hate it

[LostLocke]

OK, that does make sense.
But I guess maybe I'm reading too much into Chad's ramblings.
What I was getting was that he was saying that if universe B and C and D, etc exist, they can't have the same properties as our universe, universe A. Whereas what I get from what you said would be more like, the odds of another universe (B, C, D, etc) having the same properties as universe A, would be small, but nothing directly prevents it either.

Or am I hitting out into left field?

[Alex K]

In the models I mentioned yes, there is a small probability that they are the same. Chad probably wants to say that precisely the annoying god-killing anthropic multiverses can only be proven by finding universes with different laws, but that those are unknowable because they differ, which is something I don't follow.

[Anomalocaris]

................(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.

In it's worst possible manifestation, it can still claim to be an unfalsificable faith based conjecture that is infinitely better than the best possible manifestation of your unfalsifiable faith based conjecture, because it does not threaten you if you conjecture differently, and it does not require you to make a total ass of yourself before your provable betters by insisting they ought to prostrate themselves before an unprovable sky tyrant who is said to fuck his own mother to give himself birth, just like you do.

[LastPoet]

................(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.

In it's worst possible manifestation, it can still claim to be an unfalsificable faith based conjecture that is infinitely better than the best possible manifestation of your unfalsifiable faith based conjecture, because it does not threaten you if you conjecture differently, and it does not require you to make a total ass of yourself before your provable betters by insisting they ought to prostrate themselves before an unprovable sky tyrant who is said to fuck his own mother to give himself birth, just like you do.

Yeah well, they carry a weight to measure science and none to their beliefs. What is easier, to just believe, or to work to understand it. How much effort takes to believe in a god?

[robvalue]

Erm...

Was anyone claiming that there could be empirical evidence? What exactly is this in response to?

[JesusHChrist]

[Angrboda]

Erm...

Was anyone claiming that there could be empirical evidence? What exactly is this in response to?

I think Chad is just venting.... "Yeah, well my imaginary dad can beat up your imaginary dad!"

[robvalue]

Ah I see.

Most likely, my imaginary dad is quite pathetic. He's 0 for 37 fights, and that's against other imaginary things, some lacking basic MMA training.