Can the universe be complete without a multiverse?

[Philosophy Explorer]

It's been said that our universe has everything. BUT it's also been said that a multiverse doesn't exist. Then how can our universe be complete without a multiverse?

PhilX

[QuantumT]

Complete nonsense.

There are two definitions of a multiverse:

1: Countless universes existing side by side, but not interacting/touching.

2: Our own universe is a multiverse. Frequencies seperate them. They still do not interact, but share matter.

None of them are provable. They are pure speculation.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Complete nonsense.

There are two definitions of a multiverse:

1: Countless universes existing side by side, but not interacting/touching.

2: Our own universe is a multiverse. Frequencies seperate them. They still do not interact, but share matter.

None of them are provable. They are pure speculation.

Yet many scientists think a multiverse does exist. And without a multiverse, then no one can claim the universe is complete. Saying it's nonsense is just opinion without evidence as you just said. Would you say it's impossible to determine whether a multiverse exists?

PhilX

[QuantumT]

It can only be pointed out mathematicly, but never be proven.
Math is optimistic towards it, but is even more optimistic towards the simulation hypothesis, so even if the math suggests it, it doesn't mean it's acceptable to people.

[Erk]

If the universe is finite yet infinite, as Einstein suggested, then one universe covers all possibilities.

[Philosophy Explorer]

If the universe is finite yet infinite, as Einstein suggested, then one universe covers all possibilities.

The scientists say the universe is finite in space and time. If so, then our universe doesn't cover all possibilities according to your contention.

PhilX

[Erk]

The scientists say the universe is finite in space and time. If so, then our universe doesn't cover all possibilities according to your contention.

PhilX

The purpose of my answer was to simply point out that if it is infinite then a multiverse is unnecessary to make it complete. I doubt you can back up your claim that the jury is in and the universe is definitely finite, and I'm not claiming it's definitely infinite.

[Philosophy Explorer]

The scientists say the universe is finite in space and time. If so, then our universe doesn't cover all possibilities according to your contention.

PhilX

The purpose of my answer was to simply point out that if it is infinite then a multiverse is unnecessary to make it complete. I doubt you can back up your claim that the jury is in and the universe is definitely finite, and I'm not claiming it's definitely infinite.

This comes from my online encyclopedia:

"The proper distance—the distance as would be measured at a specific time, including the present—between Earth and the edge of the observable universe is 46 billion light-years (14 billion parsecs), making the diameter of the observable universe about 91 billion light-years (28×109 pc)."

Doesn't sound infinite to me.

PhilX

[Erk]

The scientists say the universe is finite in space and time. If so, then our universe doesn't cover all possibilities according to your contention.

PhilX

The purpose of my answer was to simply point out that if it is infinite then a multiverse is unnecessary to make it complete. I doubt you can back up your claim that the jury is in and the universe is definitely finite, and I'm not claiming it's definitely infinite.

This comes from my online encyclopedia:

"The proper distance—the distance as would be measured at a specific time, including the present—between Earth and the edge of the observable universe is 46 billion light-years (14 billion parsecs), making the diameter of the observable universe about 91 billion light-years (28×109 pc)."

Doesn't sound infinite to me.

PhilX

Once again, my purpose is not to state the universe is infinite. I've stated my purpose already. But if you must you're taking a description of the OBSERVABLE universe which would inherently be finite. That doesn't mean the universe beyond that is ultimate finite as well.

[Philosophy Explorer]

The purpose of my answer was to simply point out that if it is infinite then a multiverse is unnecessary to make it complete. I doubt you can back up your claim that the jury is in and the universe is definitely finite, and I'm not claiming it's definitely infinite.

This comes from my online encyclopedia:

"The proper distance—the distance as would be measured at a specific time, including the present—between Earth and the edge of the observable universe is 46 billion light-years (14 billion parsecs), making the diameter of the observable universe about 91 billion light-years (28×109 pc)."

Doesn't sound infinite to me.

PhilX

Once again, my purpose is not to state the universe is infinite. I've stated my purpose already. But if you must you're taking a description of the OBSERVABLE universe which would inherently be finite. That doesn't mean the universe beyond that is ultimate finite as well.

Nor does it mean it is infinite.

PhilX

[Dontaskme]

This comes from my online encyclopedia:

"The proper distance—the distance as would be measured at a specific time, including the present—between Earth and the edge of the observable universe is 46 billion light-years (14 billion parsecs), making the diameter of the observable universe about 91 billion light-years (28×109 pc)."

Doesn't sound infinite to me.

PhilX

Once again, my purpose is not to state the universe is infinite. I've stated my purpose already. But if you must you're taking a description of the OBSERVABLE universe which would inherently be finite. That doesn't mean the universe beyond that is ultimate finite as well.

Nor does it mean it is infinite.

PhilX

This 'Eye' is for ever invisible to itself and remains when all finite occurrences are 'negated.'
It’s the knower of the finite, can’t have one without the other. It’s in finite but non-finite.

That’s what infinite actually means.

.

[surreptitious57]

It has been said that our universe has everything. BUT it has also been said that a multiverse doesnt exist. Then how can our universe be complete

The Universe by definition is ALL THAT EXISTS including that which has already existed and has yet to exist as well. That includes the multiverse
if it also exists. But it can be confusing for sometimes Universe means the observable universe and not the Universe per se which arent the same

[Philosophy Explorer]

It has been said that our universe has everything. BUT it has also been said that a multiverse doesnt exist. Then how can our universe be complete

The Universe by definition is ALL THAT EXISTS including that which has already existed and has yet to exist as well. That includes the multiverse
if it also exists. But it can be confusing for sometimes Universe means the observable universe and not the Universe per se which arent the same

Since we know nothing about the unobservable universe (including whether it exists), then our observable universe is incomplete.

PhilX

[surreptitious57]

Since we know nothing about the unobservable universe ( including whether it exists ) then our observable universe is incomplete

Not if the observable universe was all that actually existed because then it would by definition be complete
Of course it could not be proven that nothing existed beyond it so such a claim could not actually be known

[Dontaskme]

It's been said that our universe has everything. BUT it's also been said that a multiverse doesn't exist. Then how can our universe be complete without a multiverse?

PhilX

Infinity cannot complete...for one very good reason. The mind is trying to take a peek up it’s own skirt here, impossible since that would be like trying to cross the horizon.



.