In fact, you can go through every detail of string theory, or the multiverse theory, and use it to say just about anything you might imagine one way or the other ~ without limit.
Some have put a cap of how many multiverse situations can really occur but I've seen folks use other math to simply demolish a cap.
So, what is going on? My personal theory is very simple ~ that in this universe at least you cannot predict the future. You can certainly project trends but you cannot predict!
The evidence for that arises out of the discovery that given a whole bunch of waves in the ocean there's a probability (may be vanishingly small) that a larger wave exists in their midst, and that maybe an even larger wave than that.
Before the discovery of real rogue waves the math used to describe fluid dynamics failed to predict the existence of such waves. Now that we know they exist we can actually describe them and their behavior quite well ~ even determine the probabilities of a wave of this, that orthe other size just popping up ~ but we cannot predict that with certainty.
Quantum tunneling depends on similar processes ~ some wave forms (electrons or protons perhaps) occurring in higher energy levels than we can predict with certainty, but occurring in any case.
It's like uncertainty prohibits us looking into the future.
|
|
String theory and multiverse theories are BS of the worst sort, motivated by a recognition of the mathematical odds against evolution in the one universe which we actually live in and know anything about.
All the male inhabitants on the Blue Planet are controlled by string bikinis that control the purse strings and leave the males on a shoestring.
It`s all one big happy web.
Could you either refer to it as “string hypothesis”, or tell us what repeatable experiment demonstrates the the truth of the hypothesis?
but, you know, the New York Times...sigh. They have a book list...
“Consider the enormousness of the problem : Science has proved that the universe exploded into being at a certain moment. It asks: ‘What cause produced this effect? Who or what put the matter or energy into the universe?’ And science cannot answer these questions.”
“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”
Robert Jastrow
The problem with string theory, is that instead of noticing that the math no longer describes reality,, we are assured that the math is correct, and that there are magic invisible universes and worlds.
Which is more plausible,, the lunacy of string theory, taken as a representation of reality?? Or that the math somewhere took a turn off the path of truth?
It’s happened before,,so many deep errors in describing reality had entire bodies of “proof”.
And there we have it, the political motive for "Science" as a religion. But there is no conflict between "truths," and science as a method for discovery of facts becomes ludicrous without an underlying belief that truth is waiting to be discovered. As such, Science is a belief system when it is taken beyond a very limited scope as a method of investigation.
A religion, I might add, in conflict with a whole plethora of other religions in the world, though Christianity is not among them. The prevailing belief in nature as a creation of nature's God, the belief that truth was "there" to be discovered because it was created by the Christian God who equated Himself with "truth," was necessary for the modern scientific method to develop.
One of these days these humanists and atheists will get the status as a religion some of their more foolish believers claim to want. As it is, this "religion of non-religion" nonsense is getting a little stale.
When you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
Funny how Krauss and others will equate the vacuum with "nothing" when they want to claim there is no God, but then claim that the vacuum is "something" when they want to explain the mass of the proton, the mass of empty space, or the flatness of the Universe.
The String theorist suffer from the same mistakes the global warming lunatics, asteroid killed the Dinos, Dark Matter, Dark energy scientist make in that they rely on computer models instead of real observations.
Like with Dark matter, “Oh our computer models show the universe should have more mass, our models can’t be wrong therefore 90% of it must be invisible!!!”
Same with string theory. Our computer models can’t be wrong so there must be 10 invisible dimensions!!
“. . . it also devotes a lot of effort to discussing the meaningless question of “Why is there something rather than nothing?”
I don’t understand why this is a meaningless question. If we knew the answer to it, I suspect everything else would follow.
Ping
On my reading list:
New Proofs for the Existence of God: Contributions of Contemporary Physics and Philosophy.
http://www.amazon.com/New-Proofs-Existence-God-Contributions/product-reviews/0802863833
In addition to understanding the science, Fr. Spitzer knows Thomist philosophy, and can detect logical errors that natural scientists often make.
I heard him on Catholic Answers. Listen for free:
http://www.catholic.com/radio/shows/proofs-for-gods-existence-part-i-6821
“Maybe in the true eternal multiverse there are truly no laws,” Dr. Krauss said in an e-mail. “Maybe indeed randomness is all there is and everything that can happen happens somewhere.”Not even a law regarding the formation of an individual universe, for example, that each universe, no matter what it's particular physical laws, must start out with a big bang?
Even a multiverse would require underlying principles, such as inflation and a infinite series of big bangs.
Both these ideas are dead ends.
Future progress will result from applying quantum ideas to space and gravity.
Loop quantum gravity shows promise.