G
Guest
I've been wanting to address the question of Multiversity with you since this possibility seems to me to be the only escape from the impossibility of time travel in any singular universe, single timeline reality.
It still has problems for me however, even if I can't dismiss it out of hand.
Multi-verse theory is the result of the Einstein-Rosen bridge concept which itself has two manifestations. A macro-cosmic one called the Lorentzian, and a micro-cosmic one called the Euclidian.
In the Lorentzian, the formation of a Black Hole presents a "throat" of space-time for a brief instant before the actual formation of the singularity itself. This is now popularized as the "worm hole" of Star Trek et al. It in itself is not Time Travel, but does (in theory) represent a very nice short cut thru space, enabling the transverse of great distances in a Relatively short time. It is also the concept exploited in the "Contact" movie that Carl Sagan's book is based on. There ARE postualtions on how this could be exploited toward the concept of Time Travel, but THOSE hypotheses themselves tend to be based on theories that are THEMSELVES shaky at best. Einstein may have thought of the worm hole, but he also said we would never be able to control or exploit it. But of course, even he could wrong.
The Euclidian manifestation however is the source of multiverse theory. This is the area of Quantum Theory (QT) where cause/effect reversal takes place in current postulations. These same postulations also say that it can only ever occur at the Quantum level, not the macro-cosmic one. Interestingly, there are those who say the new TEVATRON at Fermilab in Chicago is dangerous because it could open up a possibly uncontrollable bridge during experiments due to the power availble to it. I can't recall the web site I read it on, but one fellow even postulated that this fall during experiments, some poor Star is going to collapse somewhere in our Galaxy into a black hole, and come erupting as a "white hole" in Chicago during a TEVATRON experiment. Unfortunately, he has his Bridge concepts confused.
I'll repeat what I've said before regarding my Occam Razor concept. The Universe is not so complicated as to require "multiplicity" of it's existence. Once we admit there is even ONE "parallel" universe, we are stuck with having to admit there may/must be an infinite number of them. My first simple question would be "why"? What does reality need with them?
For me, the only answer to THAT question is for the purpose of man to find ways to skirt the paradoxes in time travel. I doubt the universe is so obliging to the whimsical concepts of man. Even if it were true, it wouldn't really be Time Travel per se would it. It would be "dimension" travel or some other term pertaining to the necessity for going some "where" else before we would accomplish going some "when" else.
If LINEAR time travel "creates" new universes, then there is already an infinite number of them. In fact, if there is not an INFINITE number of them, there can only be one. No matter what scenario I can think of that allows multiple universes, no scenario allows for a SPECIFIC number of them. It's an all or nothing thing. One, or an Infinite number. If the infinite number DOES exist, then everything that can happen, or ever will happen, alrady has. If THIS is the case, then we get into the metaphysical area which includes the concepts of God or whaterever one's individual perception of existence itself is.
As I've said, if we get metaphysical with this Time Travel thing, I can't argue with ANYTHING. It's ALL possible in any manner you can think of it.
If we try to remain PHYSICAL about it, pragmatic even, multiversity simply goes against my onw sense of logic.
Sorry I can't come up with anything better than that for this theory. It just doesn't "feel" right. And I realize that and a couple of bucks will get me a cup of coffee if I stay away from Starbucks.
Thanks for your thoughts. It's a fun discussion.
It still has problems for me however, even if I can't dismiss it out of hand.
Multi-verse theory is the result of the Einstein-Rosen bridge concept which itself has two manifestations. A macro-cosmic one called the Lorentzian, and a micro-cosmic one called the Euclidian.
In the Lorentzian, the formation of a Black Hole presents a "throat" of space-time for a brief instant before the actual formation of the singularity itself. This is now popularized as the "worm hole" of Star Trek et al. It in itself is not Time Travel, but does (in theory) represent a very nice short cut thru space, enabling the transverse of great distances in a Relatively short time. It is also the concept exploited in the "Contact" movie that Carl Sagan's book is based on. There ARE postualtions on how this could be exploited toward the concept of Time Travel, but THOSE hypotheses themselves tend to be based on theories that are THEMSELVES shaky at best. Einstein may have thought of the worm hole, but he also said we would never be able to control or exploit it. But of course, even he could wrong.
The Euclidian manifestation however is the source of multiverse theory. This is the area of Quantum Theory (QT) where cause/effect reversal takes place in current postulations. These same postulations also say that it can only ever occur at the Quantum level, not the macro-cosmic one. Interestingly, there are those who say the new TEVATRON at Fermilab in Chicago is dangerous because it could open up a possibly uncontrollable bridge during experiments due to the power availble to it. I can't recall the web site I read it on, but one fellow even postulated that this fall during experiments, some poor Star is going to collapse somewhere in our Galaxy into a black hole, and come erupting as a "white hole" in Chicago during a TEVATRON experiment. Unfortunately, he has his Bridge concepts confused.
I'll repeat what I've said before regarding my Occam Razor concept. The Universe is not so complicated as to require "multiplicity" of it's existence. Once we admit there is even ONE "parallel" universe, we are stuck with having to admit there may/must be an infinite number of them. My first simple question would be "why"? What does reality need with them?
For me, the only answer to THAT question is for the purpose of man to find ways to skirt the paradoxes in time travel. I doubt the universe is so obliging to the whimsical concepts of man. Even if it were true, it wouldn't really be Time Travel per se would it. It would be "dimension" travel or some other term pertaining to the necessity for going some "where" else before we would accomplish going some "when" else.
If LINEAR time travel "creates" new universes, then there is already an infinite number of them. In fact, if there is not an INFINITE number of them, there can only be one. No matter what scenario I can think of that allows multiple universes, no scenario allows for a SPECIFIC number of them. It's an all or nothing thing. One, or an Infinite number. If the infinite number DOES exist, then everything that can happen, or ever will happen, alrady has. If THIS is the case, then we get into the metaphysical area which includes the concepts of God or whaterever one's individual perception of existence itself is.
As I've said, if we get metaphysical with this Time Travel thing, I can't argue with ANYTHING. It's ALL possible in any manner you can think of it.
If we try to remain PHYSICAL about it, pragmatic even, multiversity simply goes against my onw sense of logic.
Sorry I can't come up with anything better than that for this theory. It just doesn't "feel" right. And I realize that and a couple of bucks will get me a cup of coffee if I stay away from Starbucks.
Thanks for your thoughts. It's a fun discussion.