I totally agree with President Palin’s decision today to ship off the last of the liberals to the detention colonies in Iran and Iraq. What? Oh, I’m sorry, guess I got shoved into the wrong Universe for a while.
Since Prez Zero took over, I feel I’ve slipped through the space time continuum into one of these many parallel universes.
This is what happens when you do science by calculation instead of science by observation.
What kind of experiments do they use to test this theory?
Forgive me for asking, but if the “universe” consists of all matter, energy, and space that exist, how can there be a “parallel universe”? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say they believe there are parts of the universe that have not yet been discovered?
These so called scientiests are from a different universe where the human mind determines reality, instead of coping with reality.
Sometimes when crossing a completely deserted street, I think I might get creamed by a car barreling down it in a parallel universe.
Interesting in light of Hugh Everett’s original “Many World’s” hypothesis of the ‘50s, that the universe splits off after each quantum possibility is actually realized rather than canceled out in their circumstances.
Interesting too how today’s M-Theory, in its various interpretations, seems to agree overall.
Yet what bearing could this have on God, which many of these “scientists” seem desperate to nullify even as supposedly not admitting their “belief” in Him?
And so when do we see the calculation of the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin?
10^10^10^7 is a scientific result. Not a very useful one, nor one which can even be described as a bound of any form, but still a nominally scientific result.
10^10^16 is a pseudoscientific result. I’m familiar with the argument behind it, but outside of the fruitcakes in the “quantum consciousness” realm, it is viewed as comedic. The formalism behind it gives rise to numerous internal contradictions within at least three different formulations of quantum mechanics. Their calculation is predicated upon a misapplication of standard quantum theory - evidence of the researchers being educated beyond their intelligence.
Though the fallacy is distinct from these, it reminds me of the argument that nothing exists that is smaller than the maximum resolution the human eye is capable of, or the argument that any process occuring over a timescale too short for human discernment is a process that occurs instantaneously.
bookmark
....In this kind of scenario, the state of the multiverse and observations made by an observer are correlated (similar to the Schrodinger cat experiment, where the outcome can be determined only after it is registered by a classical observer).
“When we analyze the probability of the existence of a universe of a given type, we should be talking about a consistent pair: the universe and an observer who makes the rest of the universe ‘alive’ and the wave function of the rest of the universe time-dependent,” the scientists write.
**************************************************************************************
This is essentially a rationale for solipsistic narcissism.
Thank God for empiricism!
Theoretical? I say if a 'consensus' of scientists believe this, then we must all accept it. Why wait for a UN resolution?
All they've got is:
FAITH.
How ironic. Humans have an inbuilt need to believe in someone or something higher than themselves. Take away the proper object of that faith, and you get all kinds of craziness.
There was no such experiment (peta would freak out over that one). Schrodinger's paradox was meant to show the limitations of the then emerging Copenhagen interpretation and that our understanding of QM is wrong - or at least incomplete. People have been misusing the paradox ever since.
OK fine but the burning question of the day is how many perpindicular universes there are.
