Once more, they are, literally, just 'hypothesises' and 'theories', which, obviously, do not necessarily have absolutely any relation at all on what is actually True and Real. For example, the 'multiverse theory' has no relation at all on what is actually irrefutably True, Right, Accurate, and Correct, which is; There is One Universe, only.
Which, by the way, is infinite and eternal, and did not begin and is not expanding.
This, my friend, cannot be refuted. And, I do not care how many 'theories' are made up by you human beings.
The definition of the 'Universe' word refutes absolutely anything in regards to the made up 'multiverse idea'.godelian wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2024 4:17 amThe difference with the above is that I use arguments from mathematics and not from physics.https://www.britannica.com/science/multiverse
multiverse, a hypothetical collection of potentially diverse observable universes, each of which would comprise everything that is experimentally accessible by a connected community of observers. The observable known universe, which is accessible to telescopes, is about 90 billion light-years across. However, this universe would constitute just a small or even infinitesimal subset of the multiverse. The multiverse idea has arisen in many versions, primarily in cosmology, quantum mechanics, and philosophy, and often asserts the actual physical existence of different potential configurations or histories of the known observable universe.
One useful way to classify multiverse models is by the degree to which the universes proposed by the model are connected—that is, by the degree to which they are part of a single system described by a well-defined physical and mathematical framework, generally with a common origin and possibly even interacting with one another.
The most well-developed model of a multiverse of proliferating space-times is based on the idea of cosmological inflation. Inflation is a hypothetical process of the early universe in which space-time would have expanded exponentially at a much faster rate than at present.
Because the concept of inflation has both good theoretical justification and observational support and because the process of generating new universes through inflation is based on reasonably well-understood physics, this model of the multiverse has gained far more prominence than previous ideas. The inflationary multiverse is also fairly connected, in that all the universes would inhabit the same space-time and interactions between neighbouring universes might, in principle, produce observable effects.
What exactly refutes itself, according to you?
This is because you believe that 'I' am an idiot, and the Fact that you, still, cannot even comprehend and understand what 'my view' here is, exactly.