In aid of his new book, The Number of the Heavens: A History of the Multiverse and the Quest to Understand the Cosmos, science writer Tom Siegfried fluffs up the idea once again, portraying the history of science as continuing demonstration of the existence of the multiverse:
Of course, just because multiverse advocates have been right historically doesn’t mean that they will certainly be right again this time. But multiverse opponents are certainly wrong to say that the multiverse idea is not science because it is not testable. The multiverse is not a theory to be tested, but rather a prediction of other theories that can be tested. Inflationary cosmology has, in fact, already passed many tests, although not yet enough to be definitively established.
For that matter, it’s not necessarily true that other universes are in principle not observable. If another bubble collided with ours, telltale marks might appear in the cosmic background radiation left over from the big bang. Even without such direct evidence, their presence might be inferred by indirect means, just as Einstein demonstrated the existence of atoms in 1905 by analyzing the random motion of particles suspended in liquid.Tom Siegfried, “Long Life the Multiverse” at Scientific American (December 3, 2019)
Okay, when another “bubble” collides with ours, we’ll pay attention. Meanwhile, the multiverse exists today for one reason only: to uphold crackpot cosmology, over against the fine-tuning of the universe. The very idea of evidence needs to be undermined in order to prevent considering fine-tuning as a fact. And many are willing to do just that.
All the Cool people believe in it, which is just so much better than evidence.
See also: The multiverse is science’s assisted suicide
What becomes of science when the evidence does not matter?
Follow UD News at Twitter!