There is no scientific evidence for a multiverse. There are a large number of intellectuals who need it to be true. At one time, there was a large number of similar people who needed witchcraft to be true.
He doesn’t seem to get the fact that string theory was a religious movement that was bound to end badly. The most distressing victim is science. But then that was well before the war on math, wasn’t it?
Well, from a novelist’s perspective, it sounds logical but from a science perspective, if you must invoke the “multiverse,” you are in trouble.
Ah yes, the problem of dead-endedness that Sabine Hossenfelder often writes about. As does Columbia mathematician Peter Woit, on the subject of string theory. But surely much of the nonsense around string theory and the multiverse is in part due to a practical failure—the inability to find even a single particle of dark matter or similar evidence for dark energy.
An essential part of the process of discovering the truth will be the disintegration ray gun… Read the fine print.
Knight: The multiverse is not pure nonsense, it is theoretically possible.But even if there were a multiverse, the generator that makes the universes itself would require fine-tuning, so the multiverse doesn’t get rid of the problem. And, as Lightman indicates, we have no independent experimental evidence for the existence of the multiverse in any case.
Readers may recall him from the four levels of multiverse he advocated in Scientific American in 2003. But forget that. He now thinks there is too much bias in American media and he is working on an AI program to combat it
He recommends Bohmian mechanics, saying that it “accurately extends and reinterprets Bohr’s original ideas of complementarity, putting them on a more solid mathematical footing”.
The Big Bang Theory sitcom’s Sheldon Cooper insists that in no universe would he dance with Penny. That mighrt be true, says Marks but there still isn’t an infinite number of universes: But, some claim, there is an infinite number of universes in the multiverse. That is ludicrous because there are no infinities in the Read More…
Some scientists are claiming so, based on an odd finding from Antarctica. Ethan Siegel isn’t isn’t taking the bait.
But doesn’t a multiverse cosmologist like Sean Carroll get to pick and choose the reality he prefers from an infinite variety? Who says there is only one reality, the one he doesn’t like?
Look at it like this: If the multiverse prevails instead, science can be opened up to a vast variety of viewpoints and interests. Because facts really won’t matter any more.
Nope. Not a chance the proposed evidence will matter. The parallel universe folk probably don’t like our universe because it shows massive evidence of fine-tuning and that implies an intelligent origin. Any alternative theory will always be popular, irrespective of evidence.
All the Cool people believe in it, which is just so much better than evidence.
It’s controversial because it is sometimes used to support the idea of a multiverse. Otherwise, it should be common sense to assume that a venue in which we exist must feature conditions that allow for that. But the multiverse does not need logic, evidence, or science.