Is there a real chance that there is a multiverse?

[Arkilogue]

Arki, can you explain your "theory" to me as if I am three? I failed to decipher your wall-of-theory back there...

Sure.

The universe is like a bubble in an ocean with no top, bottom or sides. There is only one ocean and it's infinite.

Our universe is not the only bubble in the ocean and they are all patterned the same...because there is only one ocean and it's infinite.


Getting a little more illustrative, Think of infinite white light; no matter where you pull that light apart (prism) you will get the same distribution of the same colors in the same order. So it is with the distribution of forces within each and every universe from the infinite unified state.


The only major difference between my starting state and the Big Bang theory is that my singularity has no border, is not surrounded by a nothing space that does not exist that our perspective should not be in, as shone in every media representation. I correct for that error of perspective and treat the prior to beginning singularity as an infinite field of matter in equilibrium.

[deleteduser12345]

---

This is his general response, such intelligent, much wow, veri surprise

And your response is to take quotes out of context and smash them together?

Some people say "Goddidit" and stop there on the surface.

Others (like myself) want to know exactly how God did it and pour through the sciences and religions both ancient and modern to collect the proper amount of data to apply to such a vast question and depth of process.

Some take what others tell them about God and believe or disbelieve, some wrestle with God for themselves.

 I'm going to take you seriously when you show me your Nobel Prize.

iow, where the fuck is your evidence?

So it takes a world wide appeal to consensus for you to consider anything new? Quite the handicap you have there.

Here you have it in context, what a difference, you're at fault at both points. If you have evidence, then getting a nobel prize and a world wide appeal would be easy wouldn't it? Idgaf about a world wide appeal at the moment, my point was, where's your evidence? You've yet to show any evidence, you only repeat your 'theory' when asked for evidence, you link quite bad sources. Why don't you hook yourself up with a physicists and check your theories? Are you afraid?

edit: sorry for the painful quotes, too tired to fix em

[Arkilogue]

I've seen so many of those "post-predictions of dark energy" or particle masses, which are usually based on some vague words and piles of numerology, but without a consistent underlying theory. Do you have a prediction for the scalar to tensor ratio? Or actual math for your inflation claims? What about the quartic divergences of the standard model? Is your scheme consistent with the known properties and predictions of the Standard Model?

Yes. But I'm, late for work already and will get back to you in several hours. Thanks =)

[LostLocke]

The only major difference between my starting state and the Big Bang theory is that my singularity has no border...

Neither does the BBT's singularity.

I correct for that error of perspective and treat the prior to beginning singularity as an infinite field of matter in equilibrium.

Matter? You do know that matter didn't form till after expansion started, right?

[Alex K]

The only major difference between my starting state and the Big Bang theory is that my singularity has no border...

Neither does the BBT's singularity.

I correct for that error of perspective and treat the prior to beginning singularity as an infinite field of matter in equilibrium.

Matter? You do know that matter didn't form till after expansion started, right?

Don't be so impatient, I'm sure we'll see his maths outlining the matter creation soon enough

[LostLocke]

Don't be so impatient, I'm sure we'll see his maths outlining the matter creation soon enough

I can't wait!

[Thumpalumpacus]

I've seen so many of those "post-predictions of dark energy" or particle masses, which are usually based on some vague words and piles of numerology, but without a consistent underlying theory. Do you have a prediction for the scalar to tensor ratio? Or actual math for your inflation claims? What about the quartic divergences of the standard model? Is your scheme consistent with the known properties and predictions of the Standard Model?

Yes. But I'm, late for work already and will get back to you in several hours. Thanks =)

I'm holding my breath.

[Arkilogue]

[bennyboy]

My model predicts the expansive dark energy constant to within .5%
Predicts a slight negative curvature of space-time.
Predicts rapid initial inflation followed by slow plateau of increasing expansion.
Predicts 5 times more matter entangled with the creation of ours.
Predicts a six fold division of the CMB and hemispheric asymmetry.

Oh, I get it now. You don't know what "pre-" means.

Okay, so Arki I can see that you have learned about wikipedia, and how links work. This explains why some of your vocabulary sounds sciencey. Now show us anything you HAVEN'T linked. Show us your scientific and mathematical contribution to our understanding of the universe. No more links, please, or vague talk about circles inscribed with transdimensional doohickeys. Tell us, exactly, how you have arrived at your conclusions, and are so confidently sure of them that you have stated them as facts, even using words like "obviously."

[bennyboy]