If infinite parallel universes exist ...

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

uwot
Posts: 5034
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: If infinite parallel universes exist ...

Post by uwot »

HexHammer wrote:Imo one has to be extraordinary naive to believe that infinitive parallel universes exists, specially if it's derived from the double slit experiment.

Where does all the mass go? All the mass wold collaps on itself, therefore it's nonsense.
Ah! The voice of reason. Although I understand that the double slit experiment works with electrons and other fermions, it is usually conducted with photons. What mass?
Blaggard
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:17 pm

Re: If infinite parallel universes exist ...

Post by Blaggard »

HexHammer wrote:Imo one has to be extraordinary naive to believe that infinitive parallel universes exists, specially if it's derived from the double slit experiment.

Where does all the mass go? All the mass wold collaps on itself, therefore it's nonsense.
Er it's a good job it isn't then isn't it many worlds interpretation maybe, a String Theorists wet dream. But Copenhagen is vanilla one universe non local non real wave function. Bells-Aspect experiment forbids all local real interpretations (which is where Einstein came in with his EPR paper claiming quantum mechanics must be incomplete and various other stuff about spooky action at a distance). With the exception many worlds because it claims infinite realities or universes no one believes that twaddle but because there are some big name science types associated with it it is perhaps given way more credence than it should. I personally think it's psuescientific babble for people with too much time on their hands and too much access to maths text books. It is a matter of taste, but I prefer my experiment in science where as most String Theorists don't see it as all that important. Or so it seems seeing as they never do them, and most likely never will. ;)

Also loop quantum gravity explains gravity in terms that uses mini universes or dimenstions, but again that's not mainstream either.
Last edited by Blaggard on Sun Feb 09, 2014 2:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3349
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: If infinite parallel universes exist ...

Post by HexHammer »

Blaggard wrote:Bells-Aspect forbids all local real interpretations except many worlds because it claims infinite realities or universes
All theory, nothing solid!
Blaggard
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:17 pm

Re: If infinite parallel universes exist ...

Post by Blaggard »

HexHammer wrote:
Blaggard wrote:Bells-Aspect forbids all local real interpretations except many worlds because it claims infinite realities or universes
All theory, nothing solid!
It's an experiment mate lol you need to pay attention I said that before.

http://www.drchinese.com/David/EPR_Bell_Aspect.htm

A. Aspect, Dalibard, G. Roger: "Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using time-varying analyzers" Physical Review Letters 49 #25, 1804 (20 Dec 1982).

You can read the whole paper here along with the experimental apparatus and data.

http://www.drchinese.com/David/Aspect.pdf
User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3349
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: If infinite parallel universes exist ...

Post by HexHammer »

Yes yes, I know of this, but nothing solid points towards proof of parallel universes. Scientists jumps to that conclusion, because they interpet that from the "evidense", it's just like thunder is proof of Zeus and Thor.
Blaggard
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:17 pm

Re: If infinite parallel universes exist ...

Post by Blaggard »

HexHammer wrote:Yes yes, I know of this, but nothing solid points towards proof of parallel universes. Scientists jumps to that conclusion, because they interpet that from the "evidense", it's just like thunder is proof of Zeus and Thor.
Scientists don't but the pop science world revolves around shockingly unlikely bunk passed off as science so there's a sort of skewed impression of what scientists do, I can assure you most Scientific work is very dull, repetative and you wouldn't do it unless you were paid a decent wage. Which of course they are, well usually. Unless your Einstein and you work in a patent office for example.

The latest bunkum doing the rounds is the holographic universe "theory" which followed on from a real paper asking if the universe was a computer program. It's not science though obviously.
WHATEVER kind of reality you think you're living in, you're probably wrong. The universe is a computer, and everything that goes on in it can be explained in terms of information processing.

The connection between reality and computing may not be immediately obvious, but strip away the layers and that is exactly what some researchers think we find. We think of the world as made up of particles held together by forces, for instance, but quantum theory tells us that these are just a mess of fields we can only properly describe by invoking the mathematics of quantum physics.

That's where the computer comes in, at least if you think of it in conceptual terms as something that processes information rather than as a boxy machine on your desk. "Quantum physics is almost phrased in terms of information processing," says Vlatko ...
Unfortunately scientists have a lot of down time and pop science mags do love to go rooting through their waste paper bins. ;)

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... ation.html
Post Reply