At Mind Matters News: In an infinity of universes, is another “you” reading this article?

_{Denyse O'Leary

December 18, 2021

Intelligent Design, Multiverse}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Maybe. But the recent science evidence is not especially encouraging for that.

It is generally believed that the early universe widely inflated. So, reporting on a recent article submitted to Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, Stony Brook astrophysicist Paul Sutter points out:
First off, they found that eternal inflation wasn’t nearly as common as originally thought. Their explanation for why cosmologists had thought eternal inflation was generic was because those earlier cosmologists had studied only a limited set of models. They found that many viable inflation models (“viable” here means they didn’t obviously contradict observations) didn’t lead to an eternally inflating scenario. PAUL SUTTER, “HOW REAL IS THE MULTIVERSE?” AT SPACE.COM (DECEMBER 16, 2021)

Takehome: Maybe it is much easier for us to imagine an infinite number of ourselves than for nature to make it happen. Works the same with money… – News, “In an infinity of universes, is another you reading this article?” at Mind Matters News (December 18, 2021)

You may also wish to read: In an infinity of universes, countless ones are run by cats… Daniel Díaz notes that most of the talk about the multiverse started to appear once it was realized that there was fine-tuning in nature. Robert J. Marks points out that even 10 to the 1000^th power of universes would only permit 3,322 different paths. Infinity is required but unprovable.

Comments

WJM, from your comment it appears that you do not believe that Everett's Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics is materialistic in its foundational basis. i.e. you stated, "Multiverse theory may be used now by materialists,, but,, (MWI) was just a theory by Hugh Everett to account for quantum physics experimentation data – the observer-dependent wave function collapse." Yet, MWI does not 'account' for wave function collapse. In fact, MWI, instead of 'accounting' for wave function collapse, tries to 'explain away' wave function collapse by denying the reality of Wave Function collapse altogether.
Many-worlds interpretation Excerpt: The many-worlds interpretation (MWI) is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that asserts that the universal wavefunction is objectively real, and that there is no wave function collapse.[2] - per wikipedia Quantum mechanics - Philosophical implications Excerpt: Everett's many-worlds interpretation, formulated in 1956, holds that all the possibilities described by quantum theory simultaneously occur in a multiverse composed of mostly independent parallel universes.[52] This is a consequence of removing the axiom of the collapse of the wave packet.? - per wikipedia
In short, MWI is, in actuality, atheistic materialism run amok! In other words, in Atheistic Materialists denying the reality of wave function collapse, MWI truly exposes reductive materialism in all its full blown absurdity. i.e. The material particle is given so much unmerited 'creative' power within the many worlds interpretation (MWI) of Quantum Mechanics that every time an 'observer' simply observes a particle, instead of the wave function merely collapsing, the particle, (somehow magically), instead creates a virtual infinity of parallel universes with a virtual infinity of other people observing the same particle going in a virtual infinity of different directions. (and in the process of creating a virtual infinity of parallel universes, MWI also ends up destroying "any credible account of what an observer can possibly be.")
Too many worlds – Philip Ball – Feb. 17, 2015 Excerpt:,,, You measure the path of an electron, and in this world it seems to go this way, but in another world it went that way. That requires a parallel, identical apparatus for the electron to traverse. More – it requires a parallel you to measure it. Once begun, this process of fabrication has no end: you have to build an entire parallel universe around that one electron, identical in all respects except where the electron went. You avoid the complication of wavefunction collapse, but at the expense of making another universe.,,, http://aeon.co/magazine/science/is-the-many-worlds-hypothesis-just-a-fantasy/ Why the Many-Worlds Interpretation Has Many Problems - Philip Ball - October 18, 2018 Excerpt: It, (The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics), says that our unique experience as individuals is not simply a bit imperfect, a bit unreliable and fuzzy, but is a complete illusion. If we really pursue that idea, rather than pretending that it gives us quantum siblings, we find ourselves unable to say anything about anything that can be considered a meaningful truth. We are not just suspended in language; we have denied language any agency. The MWI — if taken seriously — is unthinkable. Its implications undermine a scientific description of the world far more seriously than do those of any of its rivals. The MWI tells you not to trust empiricism at all: Rather than imposing the observer on the scene, it destroys any credible account of what an observer can possibly be. Some Everettians insist that this is not a problem and that you should not be troubled by it. Perhaps you are not, but I am. https://www.quantamagazine.org/why-the-many-worlds-interpretation-of-quantum-mechanics-has-many-problems-20181018/
Moreover, as far as experimental science itself is concerned, the MWI has now been experimentally falsified in that the collapse of the wave function is now shown to be a real effect. As the following article states, "homodyne measurements, show,, the non-local collapse of a particle's wave function.," and, "the collapse of the wave function is a real effect", and, ""Through these different measurements, you see the wave function collapse in different ways, thus proving its existence and showing that Einstein was wrong."
Quantum experiment verifies Einstein's 'spooky action at a distance' - March 24, 2015 Excerpt: An experiment,, has for the first time demonstrated Albert Einstein's original conception of "spooky action at a distance" using a single particle. ,, Professor Howard Wiseman and his experimental collaborators,, report their use of homodyne measurements to show what Einstein did not believe to be real, namely the non-local collapse of a (single) particle's wave function.,, According to quantum mechanics, a single particle can be described by a wave function that spreads over arbitrarily large distances,,, ,, by splitting a single photon between two laboratories, scientists have used homodyne detectors—which measure wave-like properties—to show the collapse of the wave function is a real effect,, This phenomenon is explained in quantum theory,, the instantaneous non-local, (beyond space and time), collapse of the wave function to wherever the particle is detected.,,, "Einstein never accepted orthodox quantum mechanics and the original basis of his contention was this single-particle argument. This is why it is important to demonstrate non-local wave function collapse with a single particle," says Professor Wiseman. "Einstein's view was that the detection of the particle only ever at one point could be much better explained by the hypothesis that the particle is only ever at one point, without invoking the instantaneous collapse of the wave function to nothing at all other points. "However, rather than simply detecting the presence or absence of the particle, we used homodyne measurements enabling one party to make different measurements and the other, using quantum tomography, to test the effect of those choices." "Through these different measurements, you see the wave function collapse in different ways, thus proving its existence and showing that Einstein was wrong." http://phys.org/news/2015-03-quantum-einstein-spooky-action-distance.html
Moreover, it is not only that experimental science, via showing wave function collapse to be a real effect, has now falsified the 'realist' MWI of quantum mechanics, but experimental science, via the closing of the 'freedom of choice' loophole, has now also shown that the instrumentalist approach to quantum mechanics to be correct over and above the realist MWI approach. First, the late Steven Weinberg explained the two widely followed approaches to quantum mechanics, the “realist” and “instrumentalist” approaches, in the following article.
The Trouble with Quantum Mechanics – Steven Weinberg – January 2017 Excerpt: Today there are two widely followed approaches to quantum mechanics, the “realist” and “instrumentalist” approaches,9 which view the origin of probability in measurement in two very different ways. For reasons I will explain, neither approach seems to me quite satisfactory.10,,,, In the instrumentalist approach,,, humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level. According to Eugene Wigner, a pioneer of quantum mechanics, “it was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness.”11,,,, In the realist approach the history of the world is endlessly splitting; it does so every time a macroscopic body becomes tied in with a choice of quantum states. This inconceivably huge variety of histories has provided material for science fiction. 12 http://quantum.phys.unm.edu/466-17/QuantumMechanicsWeinberg.pdf
In fact, the late Weinberg, an atheist, (besides rejecting the realist MWI approach as being patently absurd), also rejected the instrumentalist approach precisely because “humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level” and because it undermined the Darwinian worldview from within. Yet, regardless of how he and other atheists may prefer the world to behave, quantum mechanics itself could care less how atheists prefer the world to behave. Although several experiments have confirmed the instrumentalist approach to be correct, the main experiment that has confirmed the instrumentalist approach to be correct is the following, Anton Zeilinger and company have, as of 2018, pushed the ‘freedom of choice’ loophole back to 7.8 billion years ago, thereby firmly establishing the ‘common sense’ fact that the free will choices of the experimenter(s) in these quantum experiments are truly free and are not determined by any possible causal influences from the past for at least the last 7.8 billion years, and that the experimenters themselves are therefore shown to be truly free to choose whatever measurement settings in the experiments that he or she may so desire to choose so as to ‘logically’ probe whatever aspect of reality that he or she may be interested in probing.
Cosmic Bell Test Using Random Measurement Settings from High-Redshift Quasars – Anton Zeilinger – 14 June 2018 Abstract: This experiment pushes back to at least approx. 7.8 Gyr ago the most recent time by which any local-realist influences could have exploited the “freedom-of-choice” loophole to engineer the observed Bell violation, excluding any such mechanism from 96% of the space-time volume of the past light cone of our experiment, extending from the big bang to today. https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.080403
Thus, as far as experimental science itself is concerned, the realist MWI is falsified, and its alternative, i.e. the instrumentalist approach, is validated as being true.
1 Thessalonians 5:21 but test all things. Hold fast to what is good.
Of supplemental note: When we rightly allow the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics, (as the Christian founders of modern science originally envisioned, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, and Max Planck, to name a few of the Christian founders,,,, and as quantum mechanics itself now empirically demands with the closing of the free will loophole by Anton Zeilinger and company), then rightly allowing the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics provides us with a very plausible resolution for the much sought after ‘theory of everything’ in that Christ’s resurrection from the dead bridges the infinite mathematical divide that exists between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics and provides us with an empirically backed reconciliation, via the Shroud of Turin, between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity into the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything”
December 2021 - When scrutinizing some of the many fascinating details of the Shroud of Turin, we find that both General Relativity, i.e. gravity, and Quantum Mechanics were both dealt with in Christ’s resurrection from the dead. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/in-time-for-american-thanksgiving-stephen-meyer-on-the-frailty-of-scientific-atheism/#comment-741600 Jesus Christ as the correct "Theory of Everything" - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpn2Vu8--eE
Verse:
Colossians 1:15-20 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
bornagain77_{December 21, 2021
December
12
Dec
21
21
2021
05:06 AM
5
05
06
AM
PDT}

Multiverse theory may be used now by materialists in a failed attempt to provide enough "chance" for life to develop and other things they cannot explain, but originally it was just a theory by Hugh Everett to account for quantum physics experimentation data - the observer-dependent wave function collapse.William J Murray_{December 21, 2021
December
12
Dec
21
21
2021
02:49 AM
2
02
49
AM
PDT}

Multiverse is definitely an ad-hoc escape hatch for the materialist. But it doesn't even solve their problemszweston_{December 20, 2021
December
12
Dec
20
20
2021
06:28 AM
6
06
28
AM
PDT}

Everyone fails to address the fatal flaw in the infinite universe hypothesis. Besides creating an infinite number of us, it would create an infinite number of other things.
That is, it would create an infinite number of entities with infinite intelligence.
Then as some would imagine there would be no way for these infinite intelligences to know and be aware of each other. Absurd but it’s their only hope.jerry_{December 20, 2021
December
12
Dec
20
20
2021
04:17 AM
4
04
17
AM
PDT}

I find the multiverse hypothesis uninteresting if we are entirely isolated from them so there is no possibility of us detecting them. One possibility that would make it interesting is if gravitational fields can cross the gaps between them. Maybe that could explain the "dark energy" observation in which the more distant galaxies are, the faster they are moving away from us. They are being pulled away by the gravitational attraction of neighboring universes. The problem with that, as I see it, is that the same effect should be happening in the neighboring universes, so at some point their should be a massive collision between the two. Could that cause a Big Bang?Seversky_{December 19, 2021
December
12
Dec
19
19
2021
10:03 AM
10
10
03
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply