Professor Paul Davies logic against the multiverse...“If you take seriously the theory of all possible universes, including all possible variations,” Davies said, “at least some of them must have intelligent civilizations with enough computing power to simulate entire fake worlds. Simulated universes are much cheaper to make than the real thing, and so the number of fake universes would proliferate and vastly outnumber the real ones. And assuming we’re just typical observers, then we’re overwhelmingly likely to find ourselves in a fake universe, not a real one.”
So far it’s the normal argument.
Then Davies makes his move. He claims that because the theoretical existence of multiple universes is based on the laws of physics in our universe, if this universe is simulated, then its laws of physics are also simulated, which would mean that this universe’s physics is a fake.
Therefore, Davies reasoned, "We cannot use the argument that the physics in our universe lead to multiple universes, because it would also lead to fake universes with fake physics" That undermines the whole argument that fundamental physicals generates multiple universes, because the reasoning collapses in circularity. Davies concluded, “While multiple universes seem almost inevitable given our understanding of the Big Bang, using them to explain all existence is a dangerous, slippery slope, leading to apparently absurd conclusions.”
Davies’ reductio ad absurdum is a devastating one: the multiverse undercuts the basis of physics itself. And Davies is not alone. Physicist Paul Steinhardt, who helped create the theory of inflation but later came to reject it, declared last September: “Our universe has a simple, natural structure. The multiverse idea is baroque, unnatural, untestable and, in the end, dangerous to science and society.” Steinhardt believes that the multiverse hypothesis leads science away from its task of providing a unique explanation for the properties of nature.
The problem I see with the multiverse is akin to Prof. Davies. There has to be an absolute fixed truth about our own before we could imagine there are many others. In a universe of ordered randomness, it is still ordered and ordered by someone or something. Which means that there has to be an original absolute truth or 'pattern/model'. So which is it? There has to be an original, an absolute truth for the source of our agreement reality.
This stands true even for the atheist because why
would a person who does not believe in a creator want to spend the rest of
his/her life wondering if they are in the real 'world/universe' or not.
Even if they answered yes to that. They would be led down a slippery slope
because how would they ever know the truth of someone else's universe if they
don't know the truth of their own.
To imagine the multiverse or let's say 'believe it'
is destructive to the stability of any society. It would lead to a chaotic state
of mind- collective mind. We would find ourselves in a society that constantly doubts what
it is and why it is and which universe it really is in. Or assuming it is the fake one and if only we could get out of it and get to the real one.
You see, we are back to the basis for social reality which is agreement reality. If we doubt that we are living in the absolute truth which is our universe, an absolutely created universe, we fall... and enter into a corrupted social imagination 'universe/world'.
"For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." COL 1:16-17.
"For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." COL 1:16-17.
People who like the idea of the
multiverse are really searching for the truth of their own which is (even has
to be) the absolute truth. In Him, we live, move and have our being! ~ Acts 17:28.
Saying or believing that a multiverse exists assumes that one can know it. The only way one could know it would be if one assumes that it has the same physics; that every universe in a multiverse has the same physic laws. If they did not, how could we know them let alone know of them, right? In assuming that they are the same, we thus acknowledge that our physics is ideal as in true and even absolutely true. So then the physics everywhere even in a multiverse are as true as ours in the same way because ours are the truth of our universe. In that, we have to ask then how would anything be that much different in any universe of a multiverse given the theory of non locality which states that if something happens in one place it happens in another; well, it would not be. We would not be able to assume that in every universe of a multiverse things are just that much different. They would not be. If they were even slightly, we would rather not even notice a difference as it would likely be at the atomic level. All in all, if we have the true physics here in this universe what purpose would a multiverse/multiversion of it be? Just copies of the truth...
ReplyDeleteAnd though our truth is corrupt as in not in the perfect version it was originally created, it is still true having been created in all truth at its beginning! And, it will be rebooted to its original version by the Creator.
ReplyDelete