- Joined
- Mar 11, 2014
- Messages
- 6,684
- Reaction score
- 386
Aren't you making a claim to truth with this though?
He actually thought you are a naturalist and I am super theist
Aren't you making a claim to truth with this though?
Hype = 0 value because Maths is the language of science so it shows it's possible to have multiverse the problem is it's impossible to ever "prove or visit it". Maths shows it will never be knowed so to keep on having a Transcendent Grand universe that can never been proven is no different from theism. That's why I am saying Physics now = Religion
Aren't you making a claim to truth with this though?
He actually thought you are a naturalist and I am super theist![]()
He actually thought you are a naturalist and I am super theist![]()
Can't really say what I meant. It's not safe exposing the kids to such explicit language.
My point is that you're dissing him for making claims to knowledge when he isn't in the position to do so but in saying that you yourself are making a similar claim.
Uhu... what was my claim?
Eh, never mind.
Well, most scientists would slap you for that last statement.
Even if one cannot visit the multiverse could one not deduce it from present evidence like how they deduced the Big Bang and the expansion happened even though we couldn't go back and witness either of those...
My point is that you're dissing him for making claims to knowledge when he isn't in the position to do so but in saying that you yourself are making a similar claim.
Mathematically it's impossible because:
Law of Conservation of Mass Energy(Energy/Matter cannot be created nor destroyed) allows us to study the universe and deduce plausible theories of it's states before/after and future. You start with maths and the lab being the universe it self.
BECAUSE what the was and what is and what will ever be remains the same so the universe gives you reassurance so in easy terms universe is like a never disturbed crime scene. You have all the time in the world to keep coming for reassurance.
When you include Multiverse shit hits the fan:
You scramble numbers you will ever prove nor "test" because different universe = guesses. Different universe = different reality, in blunt terms everything that can possibly happen did happen in the multiverse because "anything" is a subset of infinity since Multiverse has infinite universes. So in some fodder universe there is a Chinese Me :|
The reason we can never know is you can't "leave this reality" for another. You are non existent in another reality.
How then did we deduce the Big Bang happened? Also, doesn't conservation of energy apply only in closed systems? I was recently informed that certain cosmologists don't think the universe is a closed system.
okay first Big Bang:
Red shift
expansion
WMAP's Cosmic Microwave Background
point to a universe "being" a single point at one "time". So origins point at a "singularity"
Now as for closed system. I don't how to properly explain this but:
An expanding universe is not a "growing" universe to fill a "space" not filled before, it creates space as time goes. There is no space and no "around", 'around' it. So even if it was infinitely big the energy/mass within it is not magically "spewing" to "outside" it because there is no "outside" 'outside' it.
Imagine a non flammable balloon and put water inside it. Burn it, the inside water will turn into vapour increasing the balloon size. The balloon is closed and the mass inside took much large space but it's still a closed conservative system. <= not as nearly as complex as the universe.
Now as for infinite yet closed system we look as advanced calculus/topology/manifolds.
Imagine 2D ants living in a high school globe(atlas globe), they have no idea of the dimension up and down. So they walk around the globe. You notice to them the globe is virtually infinite as there is no way to reach an end: same can be applied to us given universe has a hyper dimension allowing it to bend on it's self to create that extra dimension hence: Einstein's Nobel prize winning work General Theory of Relativity. Meaning to 3D creatures it's virtually infinite yet closed.
The problem is "Mathematics". It's the reason I gave before wandering to long explanationSee, we know the Big Bang happened from all those things we observe now. So why can't a similar trace be found for other universe's existing? In fact, the Everett interpretation of Quantum Mechanics gives us a good reason to accept the multiverse considering how it makes more sense than the Copenhagen one according to which "the moon may not be there when you're not looking".
The universe is infinite but closedI didn't say the universe being infinite means it isn't closed. I get that expanding means filling stuff up rather than moving the boundaries (like milk spilling from the center of the bowl all over the bowl). I asked if the universe is a closed or an open system?
That's just evidence for the Big Bang though.
This is an already existing theory, more or less. Namely that after the momentum of the Big Bang is lost, everything goes back into the opposite direction till all the existing mass is focused again in a single point which is called the Big Crunch. After that it explodes again and they cycle repeats itself.
Don't think it's a popular hypothesis though. In particular because there doesn't seem to be any kind of trace or indication that the universe would shrink.
The universe is infinite but closed
Help your self here, there is no way I am back tracking to help you understand this: "Infinite but Bounded"Someone appears to have miscalculated here :lol