thehomer:

The counter isn't necessarily the concept of the multiverse, but that the universe had to have some values. Now if you're assuming that those values are that way just for humans come on the scene, then that is simply a lot of hubris and an example of puddle thinking.



That isn't contradictory if you allow that between universes, there is no space. Even if we assume that there's only this universe, one cannot say that it is expanding into space.



The problem with the theist's idea is talking about a mind that exists without time and space. Our knowledge of minds don't simply allow for such concepts. Or do you wish to claim that your God exists in the void between the various universes?

ah here comes thehomer. Good to see you. . .long time no see.

Let us cut the chase and go straight to the meat shall we?

I am asking as a layman:

Do you believe that the big bang theory and the multiverse theory are compatible? If yes please explain how so.

Mr_Anony:
Lolololol.............isn't it funny how you shout "anonyism" anytime a difficult question is posed at you?

My dear cyrexx, there are some things that you are ignorant about. A person does not automatically become "dubious" just because he/she asked a question that exposed such ignorance on your part.

mr anony,

i never claim to know everything and definitely there are some things humans are ignorant about, @least for now. And i dont think its wrong to say "i dont know" to what i dont know but when i know something e.g. your peculiar tactics, it will be wrong not to point it out...


But enough of personal back and forth.. Let this thread continue its normal course and let us learn from those who know. Shall we.

Cheers, bro

cyrexx:

mr anony,

i never claim to know everything and definitely there are some things humans are ignorant, @least for now. And i dont think its wrong to say "i dont know" to what i dont know but when i know something e.g. your peculiar tactics, it will be wrong not to point it out...


But enough of personal back and forth.. Let this thread continue its normal course and let us learn from those who know. Shall we.

Cheers, bro

Fair enough.....If you don't understand something just say so. Accusing a person of being dubious just because you don't have the answer to his/her question is the wrong way to go about things.

Let the thread continue.

Mr_Anony:
ah here comes thehomer. Good to see you. . .long time no see.

Let us cut the chase and go straight to the meat shall we?

I am asking as a layman:

Do you believe that the big bang theory and the multiverse theory are compatible? If yes please explain how so.

Yes I think they're compatible. A universe would be a subset of the universes within the proposed cosmos of the multiverse.

thehomer:

Yes I think they're compatible. A universe would be a subset of the universes within the proposed cosmos of the multiverse.

Interesting care to go into a little detail about exactly how this works?

Mr_Anony:
Interesting care to go into a little detail about exactly how this works?

Think of it as a cosmos with multiple universes in it. Picture a bowl with some spheres in it. The bowl is the entire cosmos while the spheres are the universes. This analogy is to show the relationship not the actual structures being discussed.

thehomer:

Think of it as a cosmos with multiple universes in it. Picture a bowl with some spheres in it. The bowl is the entire cosmos while the spheres are the universes. This analogy is to show the relationship not the actual structures being discussed.

Good. Now are these universes in spatial relationship to one another?

If no, in what sense do they exist in relation to one another?

If yes, then I hope you do realize that this would mean that the big bang wouldn't be the origin of space and time.

Mr_Anony:
Good. Now are these universes in spatial relationship to one another?

They can be considered as being tangential or adjacent to each other.

Mr_Anony:
If no, in what sense do they exist in relation to one another? If yes, then I hope you do realize that this would mean that the big bang wouldn't be the origin of space and time.

It would be the origin of our space and time.

thehomer:

They can be considered as being tangential or adjacent to each other.

If by this you mean that there is no space between any two universes but that the universes a in a sense glued together, then surely our expanding universe must collide with other universes with different cosmological constants and therefore, the natural laws occurring at these boundaries would be logically incoherent and this will cause inconsistencies within our universe.

The other scenario to eliminate this problem is that our universe expands directly proportional to the contraction of our boundary universes such that the multiverse is held in a tight balance of multiple oscillating universes so that we don't experience the disturbance from other universes causing inconsistent natural laws in our universe.

The problem with this is that your model of the multiverse will need a much higher amount of precision and fine-tuning to maintain this very delicate inter-universe balance.

It would be the origin of our space and time.

Are you saying that there is space and time outside the universe?

Mr_Anony:
Red herring. Irrelevant to this thread.

Very relevant to the thread. . .You provided the testimony of a man that claimed he went to heaven as evidence for the soul and life after death. .The guy claimed god told him in heaven that there are multi-verse with life in other universe. . .This topic is about multi verse. . .Do you believe his story.? . .You can not have it both ways. .

Mr_Anony:
If by this you mean that there is no space between any two universes but that the universes a in a sense glued together, then surely our expanding universe must collide with other universes with different cosmological constants and therefore, the natural laws occurring at these boundaries would be logically incoherent and this will cause inconsistencies within our universe.

The other scenario to eliminate this problem is that our universe expands directly proportional to the contraction of our boundary universes such that the multiverse is held in a tight balance of multiple oscillating universes so that we don't experience the disturbance from other universes causing inconsistent natural laws in our universe.

The problem with this is that your model of the multiverse will need a much higher amount of precision and fine-tuning to maintain this very delicate inter-universe balance.




Are you saying that there is space and time outside the universe?

Mehn! Loaded Reply. I like this.

mazaje:

Very relevant to the thread. . .You provided the testimony of a man that claimed he went to heaven as evidence for the soul and life after death. .The guy claimed god told him in heaven that there are multi-verse with life in other universe. . .This topic is about multi verse. . .Do you believe his story.? . .You can not have it both ways. .

How exactly does what anony thinks of eben alexander's story affect the question "what exists between any two universes?"

Mr_Anony:
How exactly does what anony thinks of eben alexander's story affect the question "what exists between any two universes?"

You can ask him that since he claims god showed him multi verse with life and evil in other universe. . .

mazaje:

You can ask him that since he claims god showed him multi verse with life and evil in other universe. . .

Fair enough.......thanks for your non-contribution. You can move along now.

Mr_Anony:
Fair enough.......thanks for your non-contribution. You can move along now.

What? Cant defend your own post?


Wiegraff knows Anony's style well

wiegraf:

I estimate bros' opinion changes every 3-4 pages at most. It need not be another thread sef. To be fair, campaigning for even a local office would require one to tell bold faced lies, let alone campaigning to get to heaven. With yah'weh as the electorate even...

Reyginus: Mehn! Loaded Reply. I like this.

Lol, actually it isn't loaded. I am only showing him the logical consequences of his position. At least he is making a rational attempt unlike his insult-pandering friend; our in house "knight of atheism"

Logicboy03:

What? Cant defend your own post?

What post exactly and how is it relevant to this thread?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KayBys8gaJY

mazaje:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KayBys8gaJY

Thanks for a very nice video from qualia soup...but then on this thread, I am not making a claim I'm only asking questions. The burden of proof lies with the person who holds that the multiverse theory is compatible with the big bang theory. I don't think it does.

Mr_Anony:
Thanks for a very nice video from qualia soup...but then on this thread, I am not making a claim I'm only asking questions. The burden of proof lies with the person who holds that the multiverse theory is compatible with the big bang theory. I don't think it does.

And yu know more than the scientists that take the multiverse hypothesis as compatible with the big bang?


This is the arrogance and delusion or religion.


Anony knows more about evolution than the overwhelming number of scientists that support it

Anony knows more about the big bang than the scientists


You disgust me

mazaje:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KayBys8gaJY

I wonder why you need "proof" for something you know for a "fact" doesnt exist? you have been crying for "proof" for the last 4-5 yrs, have you nothing else to do? Strange that you are not interested in "proof" from muslims or hindus or others...

davidylan:

I wonder why you need "proof" for something you know for a "fact" doesnt exist? you have been crying for "proof" for the last 4-5 yrs, have you nothing else to do? Strange that you are not interested in "proof" from [b]muslims [/b]or hindus or others...

I have countless pages and post engaging muslims here on nairaland. . .So I really don't know what you are talking about. . .Nairaland history and post doesn't tell lies. . . .Mine is there for every body to see. . .

mazaje:

I have countless pages and post engaging muslims here on nairaland. . .So I really don't know what you are talking about. . .Nairaland history and post doesn't tell lies. . . .Mine is there for every body to see. . .

and hindus, ifa priests, shango worshipers?

Logicboy03:
And yu know more than the scientists that take the multiverse hypothesis as compatible with the big bang?

I never made this claim but perhaps it would be nice if you showed me one such scientist so I can look him up. (weird considering that the multiverse theory is widely regarded as unscientific)

This is the arrogance and delusion or religion.

Lol, really?

Anony knows more about evolution than the overwhelming number of scientists that support it

Irrelevant to the thread

Anony knows more about the big bang than the scientists

Also irrelevant since I am only asking layman questions

You disgust me

You amuse me.

davidylan:

and hindus, ifa priests, shango worshipers?

Mr_Anony:
I never made this claim but perhaps it would be nice if you showed me one such scientist (weird considering that the multiverse theory is mostly regarded as unscientific) so I can look him up.

Multiverse hypothesis is only a hypothesis- nice try to claim that it is an unscientific theory. It is a scientific hypothesis.



Here is Dr Michio Kaku explaining the multiverse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZiROWO6iVs


Here is another scientist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObxT0jybqlU




You lose, Anony. Fail

Lol, don't you just love it when our "knight of atheism" posts a video he didn't watch attentively.

Logicboy03:
Multiverse hypothesis is only a hypothesis- nice try to claim that it is an unscientific theory. It is a scientific hypothesis.

In the same way Intelligent design is also a scientific hypothesis?

The fine-tuned universe is a scientific fact that the multiverse theory tries to explain away (more on that later)

Now let us look at what our scientists actually said:

Watch Dr Michio Kaku again and try to notice how many times he uses "could be" phrases. In fact Michio Kaku makes it clear to us throughout that interview that this is something he hopes will come true after the LISA satellite is launched (by the way it is scheduled to be launched in 2014) so fingers crossed.

For now, his hypothesis is just as scientific as the hypothesis a while ago that there could be colonies of alein life forms living in Mars. There has been no observations to back up his hopes just the idea that there could well be multiple universes. Good science fiction but hardly any science there.

Brian Greene then shows up in the second video and describes the multiverse thing as a mathematical idea. Watch your video again closely from 1:15 - 2:15 and 3:09 - 3:34. He does not endorse it in any way other than saying that it is mathematically possible.

I can tell you something else that is mathematically possible: "A plate of Amala and Egusi soup is currently orbiting the planet Uranus as we speak" that's a very mathematically plausible statement but it doesn't prove anything or make it scientific until we can make observations.


Now to the meat of the matter. The question you were supposed to be answering was to show that the big bang and the multiverse theory are not incompatible. Let us examine this shall we?

1. The big bang is the explanation given as the origin of space and time. The multiverse theory must reject this because multiple universes are banging. This allows for the featuring of a lot of pre-big bang theories.

2. If the multiverse theory is true, the big bang can no longer describe the expansion of space rather it becomes a universe expanding alongside other universes within space.

3. I don't know how much attention you were paying to that video but you would notice that Dr Kaku uses the exact same language of "outside the universe speculation" you accuse theists and deists of using when we talk about subjects like the nature of the first cause etc.
At a point he even talks about many universe beginnings sprouting up in a timeless realm. He even keeps talking about throwing out the old way of understanding cosmology for the new method he is proposing. A clear indication that the two theories for explaining the cosmos are incompatible

My friend, you have not shown us any scientist that claims that the two are compatible. For the multiverse theory to work, the big bang has to be modified and tweaked to fit.


Let me even add cherry on top by telling you this:
Even if the multiverse rebuttal to the fine-tuning argument were true, it would not be michio kaku's model because the cosmological constants that allow the birth of any parallel universe originate from the ones allowing it's parent universe and therefore will remain fine-tuned to permit life.

If however in the event that the process of birthing is unstable and somehow results in a change of local physical 'cosmological constants', then it will require a very high level of precise fine tuning to prevent universes from completely destroying each other because for instance, an infinite number of gravities, and nuclear forces would all be externally acting upon our universe in varying degrees and pulling it's particles in varying directions thereby resulting in the need for a new cosmological constant to explain nature. The many universes will all be existing in such a delicate balance that they will be shooting up the fine-tuning precision astronomically.

The model for the multiverse rebuttal to the fine-tuning argument needs multiple separately tuned universes (roughly about 10⁵⁰⁰ in number) whose forces exist totally independent of one another. Only then will it be acceptable to infer that conscious life on our universe is a product of chance. If this model exists, then whatever is inbetween any two universes cannot possibly be space because once space exists between them, their "gravities" will act across it.

You lose, Anony. Fail

Poor try, you have scored no points I'm afraid.

^^^^^ you mean logicboy didnt understand the science behind the video he posted? You could have fooled me!

davidylan: ^^^^^ you mean logicboy didnt understand the science behind the video he posted? You could have fooled me!

Lol were you hoping he would?

Mr_Anony:
Lol were you hoping he would?

I was hoping he wouldnt embarrass himself for once. I guess i have to keep hoping.

@OP,

Perhaps you need to heed the words of one of the greatest scientists of all time, if you truly want to know and not merely asking your usual tactical questions

A central lesson of science is that to understand complex issues (or even simple ones), we must try to free our minds of dogma and to guarantee the freedom to publish, to contradict, and to experiment. Arguments from authority are unacceptable.
— Carl Sagan

Replace authority with God. It'll aid his assimilation.