Cosmology

It’s not time that ends in the multiverse, it’s meaning

Spread the love
x

Here, New Scientist‘s Amanda Gefter explains, “Time need not end in the multiverse” (11 August 2011):

GAMBLERS already had enough to think about without factoring the end of time into their calculations. But a year after a group of cosmologists argued that they should, another team says time need not end after all.

In any infinite multiverse, everything that can happen, will happen – an infinite number of times. That has created a major headache for cosmologists, who want to use probabilities to make predictions, such as the strength of the mysterious dark energy that is accelerating the expansion of our own universe. How can we say that anything is more or less probable than anything else?

Then they found a way to do it. Keep betting heads.

Guy begging outside the race track told us that years ago.

And free lunch is served in the adjoining room forever. In any universe but this one.

8 Replies to “It’s not time that ends in the multiverse, it’s meaning

  1. 1
    Ilion says:

    Should not an “infinite universe” be infinitely full of matter? Should not an “infinite universe” have an infinite space between all bits of matter?

  2. 2
    bornagain77 says:

    OT: This Week On Unbelievable Christian Radio; Critics of Christianity sometimes make the case that Hitler was a Christian and that it influenced the Nazi regime. Is that true? Critics of atheism sometimes make the case that Stalin’s atheism was a driving motivation for his murderous regime. Is that true? Peter Harris is a historian and Christian apologist. Ed Turner is a solicitor and atheist blogger. They discuss the historical evidence for and against both points of view.
    http://media.premier.org.uk/un.....efc9da.mp3

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    OT: Tim McGrew on Frank Turek Radio – Undesigned Coincidences – Part II
    http://www.afa.net/Radio/show......2147510644

  4. 4
    Mung says:

    Why is infinity large? Why isn’t infinity small? Infinitely small.

  5. 5
    Blue_Savannah says:

    I wonder how long before ‘the multiverse’ is proclaimed as fact in textbooks and in pop culture? Will it get the ‘acceptance by repetition’ that darwinists used to get their myth accepted as ‘fact’ without having to offer any empirical evidence for it?

  6. 6
    Ilion says:

    By definition, it is logically impossible to offer any empirical evidence for either a “multiverse” or for any “other universe.” Any empirical evidence is, definitionally, a part of the only universe we have.

  7. 7
    UrbanMysticDee says:

    In any infinite multiverse, everything that can happen, will happen – an infinite number of times.

    One possible event is that the multiverse ceases to exist, and if every possible event that can happen will happen an infinite number of times then the multiverse should have ceased to exist already. Once it ceases to exist it cannot recreate itself so nothing should exist. Something does exist so an infinite multiverse of the type where everything that can happen will happen an infinite number of times does not exist.

  8. 8
    DrBot says:

    Should not an “infinite universe” be infinitely full of matter? Should not an “infinite universe” have an infinite space between all bits of matter?

    Nope.

    It refers to an infinite space, not the contents of that space or their distribution.

Leave a Reply