Posted on 04/02/2006 7:46:13 PM PDT by snarks_when_bored
But, as I understand it, there's this difference: Everett's branching quantum universes are completely separate and have no physical contact of any kind; the multiple universes of which inflationary cosmologists speak are separate, but, in principle, they could come into physical contact (for example, one could start to expand directly into an adjacent one, that sort of thing). All of the inflationary bubbles would inhabit the same, physical multiverse, whereas the Everett universes are completely separate, alone, part of no larger entity.
Hey, it's a p a r a l l e l u n i v e r s e.
She's her own woman and he's straight as an arrow.
Heck, I was thinking DC comics already had this subject pegged with their Multiverse.
In the DC Multiverse there are 12 numerically designated Earths as well as Earths A,B,C,C-minus, D,S,and X. And for good measure there is also the Anti-Matter Universe of Qward.
God can create as many or few universes as is pleasing to Him, and His Sons and Daughters (some of you). I do know one thing, there will be no shortage of land due to overcrowded conditions in eternity.
It's worth noting that even before Everett the prospect of multiverses was raised in 'serious' physics by the Einstein-Rosen Bridge concept, wherein wormholes would connect our universe to parallel universes.
Would the bozos of that universe worship us a gods? Would they fight Holy Wars over balrog666 vs snarks_when_bored?
Maybe I'll send 'em a moon rock to worship...
Nah.
Al Gore can have his own universe if he wants
You guys playin cards?
Oh, good, somebody got the reference.
Is this question really any different from questions of religion? They both seem to be metaphysical questions that are virtually untouchable by empirical science.
So far, there doesn't appear to be any evidence for the existence of cosmic bubbles outside our own. But cosmologists are continually searching for ways to test these (and like) ideas. Read the thread referenced in my post #1 to see how recent WMAP data have supported the predictions of inflationary cosmology.
We don't know what the future will bring in the way of tests.
[Is this question really any different from questions of religion? They both seem to be metaphysical questions that are virtually untouchable by empirical science.]
BINGO.
ping
If she was Gene Roddenberry's mistress than I guess it really is good to be the king!
"By contrast, the part of our universe that we can currently see has a radius which is only about 10^26 centimeters, exceedingly miniscule by comparison."
That would be precisely one yottameter. I kid you not.
I thought I'd never actually get a chance to use that word.
-ccm
Why not, he invented it.
I do know one thing, there will be no shortage of land due to overcrowded conditions in eternity.
Well, all things considered, I reckon you won't be feeling my sharp elbows over yonder.
It's worth noting that even before Everett the prospect of multiverses was raised in 'serious' physics by the Einstein-Rosen Bridge concept, wherein wormholes would connect our universe to parallel universes.
I need to review that, AntiGuv. Were the Einstein-Rosen bridges thought (by Einstein and Rosen and others) to connect parallel universes? Or just different parts of our own universe? (I tend to think it's the latter, but I haven't checked.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.