What? From The Conversation:
The universes predicted by string theory and inflation live in the same physical space (unlike the many universes of quantum mechanics which live in a mathematical space), they can overlap or collide. Indeed, they inevitably must collide, leaving possible signatures in the cosmic sky which we can try to search for.
The exact details of the signatures depends intimately on the models – ranging from cold or hot spots in the cosmic microwave background to anomalous voids in the distribution of galaxies. Nevertheless, since collisions with other universes must occur in a particular direction, a general expectation is that any signatures will break the uniformity of our observable universe.
These signatures are actively being pursued by scientists. …
But why test it? Can’t they just get it accepted the way Darwinism is accepted, as the only thesis that can possibly be true? Force the rest of us to fund it?
As Richard Dawkins put it (p. 287, Blind Watchmaker, 1986): “My argument will be that Darwinism is the only known theory that is in principle capable of explaining certain aspects of life. If I am right it means that, even if there were no actual evidence in favour of the Darwinian theory (there is, of course) we should still be justified in preferring it over all rival theories.”
What can mere evidence offer, compared to that?
See also: Brit mid-market tabloid says Large Hadron Collider within days of discovering parallel universe
Scientific American tells us we may live in the past of a parallel universe
and why this is supposed to be science.
Follow UD News at Twitter!