Infinite Universes

[Jon_S_1]

Some cosmologists think there are an infinite number of universes. Does this conflict with the existence of God and Christianity?

I have two names of cosmologist from the book, "Is God Unnecessary? Why Stephen Hawking is Wrong according to the Laws of Physics,"who disagree with infinity universes, Alan Guth and Paul Davies. Are there any others?

The biggest thing with the infinite universes theory is not so much that it’s implausible, bit that it says nothing about where these universes came from. If this theory is an attempt to disprove God, it simply kicks the can down the street.

I personally don’t like this theory. First, there is no evidence for it, second the purpose of it is to prove we aren’t unique, and debunk the watchmaker argument for Gods existence. Basically saying there are an infinite number of universes , most turned out horribly wrong but we happen to be in the one chance in an infinite amount that made it.

I find that much more ridiculous than even a Flying Spaghetti Monster, let alone an intelligent transcendent creator.

 

[Faith1960]

There’s only 68 pages.

First he said that but then then he goes on to say, “it’s the laws of physics and mathematics that show us that the only logical explanation for the fine tuning of our universe is to say there are an infinite number of universes, (in order to overcome the Penrose number) or to say that there is a God who created this fine tuned universe.”

But then, again he writes which do you believe in: “An infinite number of universes or a God who created the universe and urges us to meditate upon his works”

He talks about God creating our universe or there being an infinite number of universes by chance. I don’t see why there isn’t a third choice: infinite number of universes all created by God.

 

[seagal]

Walter Alan Ray, author of Is God Unecessary? Why Stephen Hawking is Wrong According to the Laws of Physics says that we only have two choices, believing in an infinite number of universes or or believing that God created our universe, like their incompatible.

He may be right, he may be wrong. I personally don’t have a strong opinion either way. Al I know is that whatever the truth is, God is the final answer, the uncaused first cause.

 

[Faith1960]

First he said that but then then he goes on to say, “it’s the laws of physics and mathematics that show us that the only logical explanation for the fine tuning of our universe is to say there are an infinite number of universes, (in order to overcome the Penrose number) or to say that there is a God who created this fine tuned universe.”

But then, again he writes which do you believe in: “An infinite number of universes or a God who created the universe and urges us to meditate upon his works”

He talks about God creating our universe or there being an infinite number of universes by chance. I don’t see why there isn’t a third choice: infinite number of universes all created by God.

Ray said that, above, while Fr.Robert Spitzer says on page one in his book New Proofs for the Existence of God, “the last few years have seen several books championing agnosticism, or atheism making their way into the popular press. These books leave most informed readers quite baffled, because they ignore the vast majority(if not the entirety) of the considerable evidence for theism provided by physics and philosophy during the last few decades.This evidence is capable of grounding reasonable and responsible belief in a super intelligent, transcendent creative power that stands at the origins of our universe or any hypothetically postulated multiverse.”

Then in a later chapter Spitzer poi uses the same choice: “… belief in a non natural/supernatural cause of fine tuning our belief in a virtual infinity of hypothetical universes.”

I don’t get why they aren’t giving a third choice, a multiverse created by God.

 

[phil_at_dayboro]

Are we all perhaps looking to deeply in this ?
I could bore you all with a story my mother would tell ,
About people seeking a deeper meaning,
But doubt it would raise any interest

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The biggest thing with the infinite universes theory is not so much that it’s implausible, bit that it says nothing about where these universes came from. If this theory is an attempt to disprove God, it simply kicks the can down the street.

I personally don’t like this theory. First, there is no evidence for it, second the purpose of it is to prove we aren’t unique, and debunk the watchmaker argument for Gods existence. Basically saying there are an infinite number of universes , most turned out horribly wrong but we happen to be in the one chance in an infinite amount that made it.

I find that much more ridiculous than even a Flying Spaghetti Monster, let alone an intelligent transcendent creator.

In a multiverse the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not only possible, but necessary.

In a multiverse anything is possible except a God who created the multiverse.

Scientism 101

 

[mikekle]

Heres a piece from Oxford that proves multiple universes/ dimensions do indeed exist. I can post the actual mathematical process that proves this upon request, Ive looked at it and do not know how to understand it, wouldnt even know where to begin actually!!

dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2007/09/n–one-of-the-m.html

Heres another…

phys.org/news/2010-12-scientists-evidence-universes.html

 

[hildegaard]

An early modern treatment of the multiverse (multiscaleverse?):

http://collider.com/uploads/imageGa...on_final_horton_hears_a_who_movie_image_s.jpg

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Heres a piece from Oxford that proves multiple universes/ dimensions do indeed exist. I can post the actual mathematical process that proves this upon request, Ive looked at it and do not know how to understand it, wouldnt even know where to begin actually!!

Anyone can spin a mathematical theory.

Proving it is something else. The scientific method precludes observing parallel universes.
Hence, there is no proof that is repeatable, verifiiable, or falsifiable.

Live with it.

 

[Faith1960]

Anyone can spin a mathematical theory.

Proving it is something else. The scientific method precludes observing parallel universes.
Hence, there is no proof that is repeatable, verifiiable, or falsifiable.

Live with it.

Just because there is no proof, yet, (key word: yet) doesn’t mean a thing. Scientists learns something new every day.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Just because there is no proof, yet, (key word: yet) doesn’t mean a thing. Scientists learns something new every day.

So True! And yet there are some things they will never learn.

I’m betting this is one of them.

 

[Faith1960]

reasons.org/articles/multiverse-musings—does-it-jive-with-the-big-bang

What does this mean, below?

<<<<<<<<<< The broader BVG theory applies to any inflationary theory capable of explaining this universe. Thus, this research into an inflationary multiverse makes the cosmological argument more robust (at the expense of making more nuanced>>>>>>>>>

 

[Charlemagne_III]

In the end, it seems that a multiverse is merely an elaborate way to opt out of intelligent design of the universe we are in. If there is a multiverse, only one universe is needed to explain why we exist. We are, according to mutiverse advocates, that single universe that seems dessigned yet really isn’t. This is to find an explanation that advances pure naturalism against intelligent design. Economically it should be for scientists the most noxious scientific argument possible (since it is impossible to prove), yet for atheistic scientists it is hardly so noxious as the possibility that this universe *seems designed *because it is designed.

 

[Faith1960]

In the end, it seems that a multiverse is merely an elaborate way to opt out of intelligent design of the universe we are in. If there is a multiverse, only one universe is needed to explain why we exist. We are, according to mutiverse advocates, that single universe that seems dessigned yet really isn’t. This is to find an explanation that advances pure naturalism against intelligent design. Economically it should be for scientists the most noxious scientific argument possible (since it is impossible to prove), yet for atheistic scientists it is hardly so noxious as the possibility that this universe *seems designed *because it is designed.

Yeah well, I’ve yet to read why we can’t live in a multiverse and be created for and by God. I think it’s pretty likely we live in one.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Yeah well, I’ve yet to read why we can’t live in a multiverse and be created for and by God. I think it’s pretty likely we live in one.

I’m just wondering why you apparently are convinced of that.

Does a multiverse somehow expand God’s glory for you?

 

[Faith1960]

I’m just wondering why you apparently are convinced of that.

Does a multiverse somehow expand God’s glory for you?

I guess it does but that’s not why I think they exist. That’s based on the science.

 

[mikekle]

Anyone can spin a mathematical theory.

Proving it is something else. The scientific method precludes observing parallel universes.
Hence, there is no proof that is repeatable, verifiiable, or falsifiable.

Live with it.

Well, mathematics are generally applied, so in a way, it IS proof, plus, one could say the same thing about Jesus and God too, nothing relating to them can be repeatable, verified, or falsified, either way, its all about faith…We TRUST and hold to our faith that all we are taught is true…but in reality, we dont know for sure (in the ways you are expecting that is).

I do believe in multiple dimensions/universes, but I believe they are just another creation of God, and we currently dont understand them or what they are there for…there is quite a bit us humans dont understand but exists anyway, this is no different.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I do believe in multiple dimensions/universes, but I believe they are just another creation of God, and we currently dont understand them or what they are there for…there is quite a bit us humans dont understand but exists anyway, this is no different.

It is very different. It is a mathematical fancy for which there is no scientific proof.

Show me the multiverse!!!

 

[Faith1960]

Well, mathematics are generally applied, so in a way, it IS proof, plus, one could say the same thing about Jesus and God too, nothing relating to them can be repeatable, verified, or falsified, either way, its all about faith…We TRUST and hold to our faith that all we are taught is true…but in reality, we dont know for sure (in the ways you are expecting that is).

True.

 

[Faith1960]

From: The Case For A Creator, by Lee Strobel, “Thiests have nothing to fear from the idea of multiple universes. There would still need to be an intelligent designer to make the finally tuned universe generating process work.”

And: “So if a many universe generating system exists, it would be best explained by design.”