Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Is the multiverse detectible, BBC asks?

soap bubbles/Timothy Pilgrim

Sure, it’s detected everywhere. From the Beeb:

A few weeks ago, physicists behind the Bicep2 experiment made headlines for detecting a strong signature of inflation – ripples in the spacetime fabric of the cosmos called gravitational waves. The pattern in the sky they saw was precisely what the inflation theorists predicted.

What’s this got to do with the multiverse? No one knows exactly how inflation occurred, but some of the simplest, most reasonable ideas suggest that random quantum fluctuations in the early Universe caused inflation to stop in some regions but not in others. Inflation would thus be eternal.

In places where inflation ceased, pocket universes would form, where atoms, stars, and even planets could assemble. Our Universe would be just be one of these myriad pocket universes.

Although inflation is widely accepted, eternal inflation remains more speculative. “I’m personally skeptical of this story,” says physicist Sean Carroll of the California Institute of Technology. Still, he says, it is plausible.

Scientists may simply never find direct signs of any kind of multiverse, Carroll says. For some naysayers, that means these theories are not scientific. But that misses the point, he says. “Our job as physicists is to believe what our equations tell us.” In other words, by pursuing the maths, theorists may help us discover indirect signs of the multiverse. And eventually, enough of this indirect evidence could have been assembled to suggest that the multiverse is overwhelmingly likely. More.

On that basis, ghosts are plausible too. No shortage of indirect evidence.

How did science get to be about this kind of stuff? When did the words: How, exactly? get lost?

 See also: Science-Fictions-square.gif The Science Fictions series at your fingertips (cosmology).

Follow UD News at Twitter!

One last comment This is a psychological issue more than scientific. These people feel the noose tightening. There has been a ratcheting up of anger from atheists around the world. They have never felt more threatened by the truth. What many Christians dont consider is that these people are coming face to face with their own doom if they are wrong. Most of them are not actively searching for truth..their positions are solidified. Most have said things they cant take back. They mocked God and his people and enjoyed it. They feel there is simply no turning back so they are animals who are cornered. Psychologically, they need this issue resolved so they can sleep at night. They need people to accept Multiverse now. This is personal for them. I mean, what other scientific question is so potent that the result determines if your doomed or not? So its important to understand what is at stake for these people if you are to comprehend their behavior. serious123
HERE THE CRUX OF situation These people are all professed ATHEISTS. Thats a huge red flag. All you have to do is look up all the guys who are trying push MV..like death from a thousand cuts..to slowly but surely brace the public, essentially soften us up, for the big blow....we changed the definition of science because the FT points directly to a Creator. So this is not coming from theists or soft agnostics...it is coming from Hard Core atheists who are essentially activists. They have written book, articles, done debates--all mocking Christianity. So when such a biased source is at the tip of spear--someone has got to come forward and expose them. serious123
Building 429 - Listen to the Sound - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbLbOLitoY4 bornagain77
as to:
“Our job is to believe what our equations tell us.”
Beauty is in the ear of the listener?
Alexander Vilenkin comments on the beauty of mathematics being ideally suited for describing our physical universe (particularly Euler's Identity - e^ipi+1=0) Quote: "It appears that the Creator shares the mathematicians' sense of beauty." - Alexander Vilenkin http://rfforum.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=3754268
And indeed Vilenkin has reason to be impressed with the beauty of Euler's Identity:
God by the Numbers - Connecting the constants Excerpt: The final number comes from theoretical mathematics. It is Euler's (pronounced "Oiler's") number: e^pi*i. This number is equal to -1, so when the formula is written e^pi*i+1 = 0, it connects the five most important constants in mathematics (e, pi, i, 0, and 1) along with three of the most important mathematical operations (addition, multiplication, and exponentiation). These five constants symbolize the four major branches of classical mathematics: arithmetic, represented by 1 and 0; algebra, by i; geometry, by pi; and analysis, by e, the base of the natural log. e^pi*i+1 = 0 has been called "the most famous of all formulas," because, as one textbook says, "It appeals equally to the mystic, the scientist, the philosopher, and the mathematician.",,, The discovery of this number gave mathematicians the same sense of delight and wonder that would come from the discovery that three broken pieces of pottery, each made in different countries, could be fitted together to make a perfect sphere. It seemed to argue that there was a plan where no plan should be.,,, Today, numbers from astronomy, biology, and theoretical mathematics point to a rational mind behind the universe.,,, The apostle John prepared the way for this conclusion when he used the word for logic, reason, and rationality—logos—to describe Christ at the beginning of his Gospel: "In the beginning was the logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God." When we think logically, which is the goal of mathematics, we are led to think of God. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/march/26.44.html?start=3
Moreover, I'm amazed at how quickly atheists forget (intentionally or not) what Godel's incompleteness theorem 'tells us' about mathematics:
Kurt Gödel - Incompleteness Theorem - video http://www.metacafe.com/w/8462821 THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS - DAVID P. GOLDMAN - August 2010 Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel's critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes. http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians Godel and Physics - John D. Barrow Excerpt (page 5-6): "Clearly then no scientific cosmology, which of necessity must be highly mathematical, can have its proof of consistency within itself as far as mathematics go. In absence of such consistency, all mathematical models, all theories of elementary particles, including the theory of quarks and gluons...fall inherently short of being that theory which shows in virtue of its a priori truth that the world can only be what it is and nothing else. This is true even if the theory happened to account for perfect accuracy for all phenomena of the physical world known at a particular time." Stanley Jaki - Cosmos and Creator - 1980, pg. 49 http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0612253.pdf
In fact mathematics, specifically our ability to 'do mathematics' in the first place, tells us something else that is very beautiful. (But will atheists ever listen to that beauty?)
"Nothing in evolution can account for the soul of man. The difference between man and the other animals is unbridgeable. Mathematics is alone sufficient to prove in man the possession of a faculty unexistent in other creatures. Then you have music and the artistic faculty. No, the soul was a separate creation." Alfred Russell Wallace, New Thoughts on Evolution, 1910 An Interview with David Berlinski - Jonathan Witt Berlinski: There is no argument against religion that is not also an argument against mathematics. Mathematicians are capable of grasping a world of objects that lies beyond space and time …. Interviewer:… Come again(?) … Berlinski: No need to come again: I got to where I was going the first time. The number four, after all, did not come into existence at a particular time, and it is not going to go out of existence at another time. It is neither here nor there. Nonetheless we are in some sense able to grasp the number by a faculty of our minds. Mathematical intuition is utterly mysterious. So for that matter is the fact that mathematical objects such as a Lie Group or a differentiable manifold have the power to interact with elementary particles or accelerating forces. But these are precisely the claims that theologians have always made as well – that human beings are capable by an exercise of their devotional abilities to come to some understanding of the deity; and the deity, although beyond space and time, is capable of interacting with material objects. http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/10/found-upon-web-and-reprinted-here.html
Verse and Music
John 8:47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God." Casting Crowns - Does Anybody Hear Her – http://myktis.com/songs/does-anybody-hear-her/
Supplemental note as to what math 'tells us' about inflationary bubble universes:
A Matter of Considerable Gravity: On the Purported Detection of Gravitational Waves and Cosmic Inflation – Bruce Gordon – April 4, 2014 Excerpt: Thirdly, at least two paradoxes result from the inflationary multiverse proposal that suggest our place in such a multiverse must be very special: the “Boltzmann Brain Paradox” and the “Youngness Paradox.” In brief, if the inflationary mechanism is autonomously operative in a way that generates a multiverse, then with probability indistinguishable from one (i.e., virtual necessity) the typical observer in such a multiverse is an evanescent thermal fluctuation with memories of a past that never existed (a Boltzmann brain) rather than an observer of the sort we take ourselves to be. Alternatively, by a second measure, post-inflationary universes should overwhelmingly have just been formed, which means that our existence in an old universe like our own has a probability that is effectively zero (i.e., it’s nigh impossible). So if our universe existed as part of such a multiverse, it would not be at all typical, but rather infinitely improbable (fine-tuned) with respect to its age and compatibility with stable life-forms. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/04/a_matter_of_con084001.html
I love the quote: "Our job is to believe what our equations tell us." As if man made equations are a living representation of that which is real. What numbers could one write on a piece of paper, which would show us things which could never be seen. The world of advanced math is chock full of equations which are simply games of numbers. Is infinity a number? It is if you call it that, yet it changes nothing of the fact of whether infinity exits or not. Is there a number larger than infinity, Sure, infinity plus 1. Is zero a number? What does it represent in reality? Numbers mean absolutely nothing until we pair a number up with a concept that it represents. 4Squibble(^&&) + 99kakamoree (!NH*) =7blababamorris (fu) 4^&& +99!NH*=7fu (prove it wrong). as long as the things that blabamorris represents are imaginations in my mind. phoodoo

Leave a Reply