F
Faith1960
Guest
“Heavens” is plural, which could include a multiverse. But the Bible, nor the CCC are science textbooks.
- Status
F
Faith1960
Guest
I guess if it’s good enough for the Vatican Observatory to consider the possiblity of multiverses, it’s good enough for us regular folks.
vaticanobservatory.org/AReports/ARepI03.html
<<<<<<<ELLIS and KIRCHNER (Department of Mathematics, University of Cape Town), with STOEGER, have completed preliminary work on the cosmology of multiverses, which are ensembles of many universes or universe domains. These have received a great deal of attention recently, both as the natural outcome of the originating process that generated our own universe, and as an explanation for why our universe appears to be fine-tuned for life and consciousness. In their work so far, they have carefully considered how multiverses should be defined, stressing the distinction between the collection of all possible universes and ensembles of really existing universes. It is only ensembles of really existing universes that provide a possible resolution to the fine-tuning problem. Furthermore, it is very clear that such realized multiverses are by no means unique. To define them adequately, a proper measure on the space of all really existing universes or universe domains is required, so that probabilities can be calculated. And for each such multiverse a distribution function is also needed to specify which, and how many of each, possible universes are realized. Physically, this means there must be a cosmogonic process, such as Andrei Linde’s “chaotic inflation,” which is capable of generating the really existing multiverse with its given distribution function describing the variety of universes it contains. This indicates that any really existing multiverse we consider must have some common generating mechanism or process. It appears, furthermore, that really existing universes cannot have an infinite number of members, since there are strong philosophical arguments against any realized infinity. Infinity is not a specifiable number that can be concretely instantiated.
Finally, ELLIS, KIRCHNER, and STOEGER address the issue of the stability of multiverses. Obviously, they are not directly testable¾we will never be able to observe, or receive information from, other universes. However, though it may seem unlikely, we may be able to confirm their existence indirectly. This is possible if there are cosmological theories relying on the existence of multiverses that enjoy long-term success and fruitfulness, that is, they provide greater and greater well-confirmed intelligibility for our universe and the characteristics it possesses. This would mean, for instance, that we were able to determine that our universe originated by some process, driven by a specific type of potential, that explains the detailed history and physics of our universe¾including its propensity for complexity and life¾and which at the same time would more than likely produce many other universes of different types. Ideas for such potentials have been suggested, but so far none of them are particularly compelling or well constrained. ELLIS, KIRCHNER, and STOEGER are currently preparing another paper focusing in detail on the philosophical issues raised by multiverses.>>>>>>>>>>
vaticanobservatory.org/AReports/ARepI03.html
<<<<<<<ELLIS and KIRCHNER (Department of Mathematics, University of Cape Town), with STOEGER, have completed preliminary work on the cosmology of multiverses, which are ensembles of many universes or universe domains. These have received a great deal of attention recently, both as the natural outcome of the originating process that generated our own universe, and as an explanation for why our universe appears to be fine-tuned for life and consciousness. In their work so far, they have carefully considered how multiverses should be defined, stressing the distinction between the collection of all possible universes and ensembles of really existing universes. It is only ensembles of really existing universes that provide a possible resolution to the fine-tuning problem. Furthermore, it is very clear that such realized multiverses are by no means unique. To define them adequately, a proper measure on the space of all really existing universes or universe domains is required, so that probabilities can be calculated. And for each such multiverse a distribution function is also needed to specify which, and how many of each, possible universes are realized. Physically, this means there must be a cosmogonic process, such as Andrei Linde’s “chaotic inflation,” which is capable of generating the really existing multiverse with its given distribution function describing the variety of universes it contains. This indicates that any really existing multiverse we consider must have some common generating mechanism or process. It appears, furthermore, that really existing universes cannot have an infinite number of members, since there are strong philosophical arguments against any realized infinity. Infinity is not a specifiable number that can be concretely instantiated.
Finally, ELLIS, KIRCHNER, and STOEGER address the issue of the stability of multiverses. Obviously, they are not directly testable¾we will never be able to observe, or receive information from, other universes. However, though it may seem unlikely, we may be able to confirm their existence indirectly. This is possible if there are cosmological theories relying on the existence of multiverses that enjoy long-term success and fruitfulness, that is, they provide greater and greater well-confirmed intelligibility for our universe and the characteristics it possesses. This would mean, for instance, that we were able to determine that our universe originated by some process, driven by a specific type of potential, that explains the detailed history and physics of our universe¾including its propensity for complexity and life¾and which at the same time would more than likely produce many other universes of different types. Ideas for such potentials have been suggested, but so far none of them are particularly compelling or well constrained. ELLIS, KIRCHNER, and STOEGER are currently preparing another paper focusing in detail on the philosophical issues raised by multiverses.>>>>>>>>>>
C
Charlemagne_III
Guest
They can, but why should they since there is no concrete evidence they even exist?
I
irishpatrick
Guest
It amazes me how easily common sense leaves the track. The definition of the word “universe” is: all existing matter and space considered as a whole;.
“ALL EXISTING MATTER!”
Through all time, when people spoke of the “universe,” they were speaking about all existing matter. It amazes me how often we pervert the definition of words today, in order to suit our own agendas.
Perhaps there are unseen and undetected “realms” in the universe, yet those “realms” are within the one single universe as is all exisiting matter.
Since the word “universe” includes all matter (everything down to the smallest level), than the multiverse theory poses a concept that essentially says: there are an infinite number of instances of everything–or there are multiple “everythings.” There cannot be multiple “everythings” since the word itself includes everything.
“ALL EXISTING MATTER!”
Through all time, when people spoke of the “universe,” they were speaking about all existing matter. It amazes me how often we pervert the definition of words today, in order to suit our own agendas.
Perhaps there are unseen and undetected “realms” in the universe, yet those “realms” are within the one single universe as is all exisiting matter.
Since the word “universe” includes all matter (everything down to the smallest level), than the multiverse theory poses a concept that essentially says: there are an infinite number of instances of everything–or there are multiple “everythings.” There cannot be multiple “everythings” since the word itself includes everything.
F
Faith1960
Guest
I never thought of it that way, but you’re right.It amazes me how easily common sense leaves the track. The definition of the word “universe” is: all existing matter and space considered as a whole;.
“ALL EXISTING MATTER!”
Through all time, when people spoke of the “universe,” they were speaking about all existing matter. It amazes me how often we pervert the definition of words today, in order to suit our own agendas.
Perhaps there are unseen and undetected “realms” in the universe, yet those “realms” are within the one single universe as is all exisiting matter.
Since the word “universe” includes all matter (everything down to the smallest level), than the multiverse theory poses a concept that essentially says: there are an infinite number of instances of everything–or there are multiple “everythings.” There cannot be multiple “everythings” since the word itself includes everything.
M
mikekle
Guest
Great post!
I also agree and believe in multiverse/ many different dimensions, but had no idea why they exist, but I do know for a FACT, God created them and he certainly has a reason.
I think this subject is just one more of those things that humans simply cannot understand, or really even truly comprehend what they are. People in modern times seem SOOO accepting of what ever modern science tell us…yet everyone knows at one point, it was common knowledge the earth was flat, it was also once common knowledge that radium was good for just about everything!
If you look back to 100 years ago and see some of the screwy things they believed in, we laugh about it today and seem SO sure we know the ‘real’ truth today…?? But I often wonder what people 100, 500, 10, 000 years from now, will be laughing about some of the crazy things people in the early 2000s thought!!
Im positive they will saying things like ‘how could those people seriously have believed those things back then’? Puts everything into perspective!
F
Faith1960
Guest
Are you still Catholic or, if not, what religion are you?
R
raroberto
Guest
An infinite God allows for infinite possibilities.
Why do we adore God the Father, “Creator of all things visible and invisible,” and then expect His Creation to be anything other than ongoing?
Why do we adore God the Father, “Creator of all things visible and invisible,” and then expect His Creation to be anything other than ongoing?
O
opusAquinas
Guest
Even if there are multiverses - Jesus became Man. So if there are creatures with souls who are fallen we must preach the Gospel to them. But how can we communicate to them?
M
mikekle
Guest
Well, it might be tough to figure out if they have souls, and if they are fallen.
However if they are, then I think Jesus would ‘make sure’ we could understand each other ( in a situation like this anyway, when you are trying to preach the gospel to them).
- Status