Timelines Are Meaningless In An Infinite Universe

T

Twighlight

Quantum Scribe
Proponents of the 'Many Worlds' theorem....the basis of multiple timelines.....often argue that every time any event occurs a whole new universe ( or timeline or whatever ) is created.

There's a major snag with this, though. It looks increasingly like the universe is infinite, and that wrecks the entire timelines hypothesis. Why ?

Well....by definition, in an infinite universe every conceivable permutation of events is occuring. In fact, every conceivable permutation of events is occuring - right now - an infinite number of times. Somewhere out there in OUR universe.....there's a planet Earth where you are president of the USA. Or were never born.

It is thus NOT POSSIBLE for another universe to 'split off' that is different from our own....because given that our universe contains every possible permutation.....how can one split off that is 'different' ?

The entire 'timelines' malarkey collapses. If another universe cannot be different......how can one have different timelines ?

'Divergence' becomes meaningless. How can one 'diverge' from a universe that contains every conceivable permutation of events ?
 
I understand what you are saying.
But I can give you an even clear
answer to what you want.

If you want to create a new time line
the you must support that line with
the creation of mass(matter). With
the theory of conservation of energy
will then also result in the conservation
of mass theory.

What I then am trying to get at is for every
time line created you must create mass
and energy to support it. So if you
want infinite time line then you must have
infinite mass which is impossible. So
where does this mass come from out of the
air. My answer is 'no' you can't create
new matter so multiple time lines can
not be created without supported mass and
thus there is only one timeline. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Twilight,

You should probably read Everett's paper. Yes, it is a PhD level paper (it was his PhD dissertation) with some very advanced math in it, but the entire paper is just a couple of pages long.

http://www.univer.omsk.su/omsk/Sci/Everett/paper1957.html

The real problem is not the suggestion by Everett (which really hasn't been accepted) it is the Internet alt-sci spin. The spin rarely has anything to do with the paper.

Anyway, if you don't read the paper here's the last few paragraphs (which is the entire "Discussion" section):

The theory based on pure wave mechanics is a conceptually simple, causal theory, which gives predictions in accord with experience. It constitutes a framework in which one can investigate in detail, mathematically, and in a logically consistent manner a number of sometimes puzzling subjects, such as the measuring process itself and the interrelationship of several observers. Objections have been raised in the past to the conventional or "external observation" formulation of quantum theory on the grounds that its probabilistic features are postulated in advance instead of being derived from the theory itself. We believe that the present "relative-state" formulation meets this objection, while retaining all of the content of the standard formulation.
.
While our theory ultimately justifies the use of the probabilistic interpretation as an aid to making practical predictions, it forms a broader frame in which to understand the consistency of that interpretation. In this respect it can be said to form a metatheorХ for the standard theory. It transcends the usual ''external observation" formulation, however, in its ability to deal logically with questions of imperfect observation and approximate measurement.
.
The "relative state" formulation will apply to all forms of quantum mechanics which maintain the superposition principle. It may therefore prove a fruitful framework for the quantization of general relativity. The formalism invites one to construct the formal theory first, and to supply the statistical interpretation later. This method should be particularly useful for interpreting quantized unified field theories where there is no question of ever isolating observers and object systems. They all are represented in a single structure, the field. Any interpretative rules can probably only be deduced in and through the theory itself.
.
Aside from any possible practical advantages of the theory, it remains a matter of intellectual interest that the statistical assertions of the usual interpretation do not have the status of independent hypotheses, but are deducible (in the present sense) from the pure wave mechanics that starts completely free of statistical postulates.
Click to expand...

By just reading the summation you can glean that Everett’s paper:

Attempts to define observer/system causal relationships in quantum mechanics in a way that is consistent with our experience (observations)

Declares that the interpretation is statistical in nature

Retains the content of the Copenhagen Interpretation (Niels Bohr, who was a peer reviewer of the paper and wrote his objections to it)

Attempts to give a way to quantize General Relativity

Note: It makes no mention of alternate worlds, parallel worlds, divergence or alternate “worldlines”. Just superpositions of probabilities viewed in a different light than is done in the Copenhagen Interpretation.
 
Maybe... in the beginning there was one timeline. And every event that takes place that alters the 4th dimension spawns a new timeline. That new timeline then creates an antimatter to balance out the matter that was created in the alternate universe.

The antimatter causes the universe to expand. Because people have been playing with time in multiple timelines, the alternate universes have begun to increase and expand at an exponential rate. All the resultant antimatter , as a whole, effects each universe, thus causing (and explaining) the current expansion of the universe with acceleration that astrophysicists are now measuring.

....just a thought.
 
Paladius

Great idea; Here another fun thought.

You said that matter is being created
all the time. Well you just might be
right. All our planet and satellites
are expanding including our Moon and
Earth. If you shrink the Earth you
will fined that all the plates on the crust
merge into one and that is true with a
lot of satellites in our solar systems.

So if you want to create matter why not
in the center of a planet from inside
out. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
Note: It makes no mention of alternate worlds, parallel worlds, divergence or alternate “worldlines”. Just superpositions of probabilities viewed in a different light than is done in the Copenhagen Interpretation.
Click to expand...


Indeed. My understanding of quantum superposition is that whilst realities might be superimposed, the actual number of realities is still one.
 
If time and space are truly infinite then what need is there far an alternate or multi universes?
infinity times infinity = infinity
infinity divided by infinity = infinity
so on and so forth,
A multi universe concept is simply infinity spiraling off of infinity.
 
Who needs the multiverse or many worlds. This experiment showed that our universe is quite complex enough without creating imaginary universes. The appearance of "antinucleus" along with other "anti" particles shows that the concept about other dimensions being at planck length to be quite probable. It took a trillion degrees to make this somewhat apparent. Perhaps Cern will take it the additional distance to show us how these dimensions may be manipulated.

For those of you who know me, I have long held that travel in time will necessarily be accessed at the Planck length and that the device to access it is found within the pages of the scriptures. This new finding just puts the nail in the coffin of standard "romanticized" time travel. I am leaning more and more on the only possible way to do timetravel is at the Planck length in cyberspace. The device and the universe can be built there and all paradoxes removed. With Virtual Reality, we can virtually travel in time--and who knows, perhaps literally as well. We still do not know the full complexity of cyberspace. The experiments that I have done in the past shows that realistic 3D (or even more complex?) can be created in cyberspace. With Google, we can now "fly" to many stars and planets in our universe. This is all done with space-age technology, but who is to say that a universal model cannot be made that could simulate our reality. Literal space/time travel may not be available to us, but virtual may be. It is my opinion that cyberspace has all the same qualities as physical space (and IS physical space in a different way), including wormholes, rivers of space/time and many forms of radiation that can be created with such programs as 3DStudio and other CAD programs.

As I've shown (as Zerubbabel) that there are lasers, masers and other technological devices within the Old Testament Sanctuary designed to reduce ourselves to the Planck level, this can only be done in cyberspace. Cyberspace is infinite within a finite medium, but has the capability to expand to other infinities--just as the universe does. Cyberspace is, after all, part of THIS universe and is therefore is accessible by it. By that I mean that a wormhold created in cyberspace could very well emerge somewhere IN THIS UNIVERSE and TIME. It is an intriquing thought. Time travel at your fingertips for every single person on earth. I've always believed this--not some imaginary, elite "timecop"; but everyday average people like you and me as the ultimate form of entertainment. Sound farfetched? Maybe it is, but I see no other way of possibility at this point in time. This would certainly explain why we "see" no time travelers, any more than they would see us traveling in cyberspace.

In any case, we are discovering things about our universe that we didn't even imagine. I have a feeling that we are going to find something even more of an enigma than the Higgs Boson. This is a very exciting period for science, psychology and spirituality. I have a sneaky suspicion that we are being "led" to discover these things.



http://www.physorg.com/news186931143.html
 
maybe the universe itself is infinite, but the timelines are not, but they are infinitely growing, and each one branches more and so on, infinitely
 
If all these different time lines were to be some how examined, wouldn't it be discovered that they simply mirror each other at some point, In each infinite time line, Any and all possible scenario's would be exhausted.
 
As I've shown (as Zerubbabel) that there are lasers, masers and other technological devices within the Old Testament Sanctuary designed to reduce ourselves to the Planck level, this can only be done in cyberspace. Cyberspace is infinite within a finite medium, but has the capability to expand to other infinities--just as the universe does. Cyberspace is, after all, part of THIS universe and is therefore is accessible by it.
Click to expand...


It is logically and physically not possible for any cyberspace within this universe to represent an entire other universe. It stands to reason that you cannot have more particles in a cyberspace world than there are atoms to represent them and carry their information in this one.
 
Seems like branching timelines would resemble a neural net similar to the networks inside our own heads. God made man in the image of himself, well maybe God made more than man in his own image. Why not, right?

As for shrinking/expanding planets, I think all planets grow in size because of gravity drawing in space dust. The Earth gains 10 tones each and every day in space dust. Over 600 million years, than means Earth starts to get fat.

Infinity, . Isn;t the definition of it that it is itself times itself, forever and ever? Only need to use the word once. But is the Universe really infinite? I think the potential is infinite, but the actual is not. It's like the neural net, it grows and grows. And it can keep growing and thus has infinite potential, but looking at our brains from the outside, we can understand the concept of our brains and neural nets being finite (fits in our heads). The neural net has the capability to expand in any direction (via thought) to infinity and beyond (an oxymoron, but reminds me Buzz). But the Universe, i think, is only as big as we imagine and nothing more.
 
What I have heard from the Montauk Project is that when you make changes to the past you force the original timeline to split. If there are too many splits there is not enough energy. This causes the original timeline and its all its branches to blink out.

Perhaps on another timeline our economy is wonderful and we all have flying cars. However, my prediction of a coming financial armageddon still stands.

Taken From http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/12/news/companies/lehman_examiner/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=Sbin
"Lehman's bankruptcy filing on Sept. 15, 2008 -- the largest Chapter 11 filing in financial history -- capped a 95% slide in the firm's stock price and unleashed a crisis of confidence that threw financial markets worldwide into turmoil, sparking the worst crisis since the Great Depression."
 
HDRKid.

I think your right on this point.
I think we have one physical timeline
but all other time lines are really
probable future of possible
manifestation. And if chosen from
all other probabilities it becomes
physical as the prime physical timeline.

Thus the conservation of matter is
guaranteed.
 
Actually it's more complex even than that. Some scientists, such as Professor Paul Davies, have suggested that quantum effects may mean we can change the past of our OWN timeline. This is largely because, until it is actually observed....it is not fixed but exists in a superposition state. What Davies is essentially saying is that the further back in our time you go, the less certain and fixed everything is until an observer actually observes it. May not sound like common sense....but that's quantum mechanics for you.
 
"coming financial Armageddon". Spot on!

OUr economy right now,it similar to a mountain of rock held in the sky by by crumbling pillars and a fat man blowing air up underneath the mountain which makes the pillars just strong enough to hold things up. When the fat man becomes out of breathe (aka US stimulus funds run out)the mountain (our economy) will fall. 2008 was an earthquake, not a mountain dropping from the sky.

The stimulus funds for states run out in 2010. The 2011 state budgets will be coming out between April and June and my guess is that China dumps the dollar during that time. Then unemployment checks will stop, tax rebates will stop, Medicaid payments and section 8 will stop, park service, garbage pickup, etc will slowdown, government employees will get massive furloughs, homies in the hood will go ape, there will be a run on the banks, but the fed recently passed a law stating that if you want to take out more than $600 of your own money out of the bank, you need to give the bank 7 days notice, which will allow the banks to withhold YOUR money until the "special" people have time to get their money out. That will be the tipping point that turns regular citizens into angry destructive mobs, martial law will called in, clashes between protesters and MPs will turn deadly against some farmers wife or mother. Rebel forces will start to take out MP forces, some MPs will say "fuckit, I'm going home to my wife and kids". MPs will be called back to protect government green zones, major cities will be overrun with lawlessness.

That is not written in stone, but that scene is at the highest probability right now that it has ever been.
 
but the fed recently passed a law stating that if you want to take out more than $600 of your own money out of the bank, you need to give the bank 7 days notice
Click to expand...

Ummmmm...citation please? (And no citing HDRKid!) :eek:

RMT
 
After looking into more, it was a long standing rule, but customers of some banks are being warned about it recently. I don't think it has ever been enforced, but likewise, I don't think the genral public knows about it. STill, I think the administration would pull that string if there was run on banks, and being that the genral public is not aware of this policy, it can still cause riots.

http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-news/2010/02/25/citibank-notice-highlights-fed-rule-that-could-limit-your-access-to-money/


February 25th, 2010
Citibank Notice Highlights Fed Rule that Could Limit Your Access To Money

A letter sent out to Citibank customers this month has said that starting April 1st, the bank may reserve the right to require a seven day advance notice on withdrawals from checking accounts.

New Reminder, Old Policy
The right to withhold withdrawals for seven days is a long standing Fed policy, that went into effect when the bank went back to standard FDIC coverage in 2010, according to a statement by Citibank that appeared on the Prison Planet blog. According to this statement, the requirement is part of the Federal Reserve Regulation D, and while they have communicated the requirement to their customer, they have never utilized the rule and do not plan to in the future.
Concerned Customers
The rule, also found in a Client Manual sent out at the beginning of the year, is bound to concern customers who are accustomed to being able to withdraw their funds at any time, without having to provide advance notice to the bank.
“We reserve the right to require seven (7) days advance notice before permitting a withdrawal from all checking, savings and money market accounts. We currently do not exercise this right and have not exercised it in the past,” reads the manual.
The reiteration of the rule in a letter sent out to consumers is also bound to stir up rumors of a bank run, as such rules are generally provided to protect against customers withdrawing their funds en masse. Especially with the recent financial crisis, Citibank’s highlighting their right to withhold withdrawals for even days could lead to even more uncertainty over the state of the industry.
 
OUr economy right now,it similar to a mountain of rock held in the sky by by crumbling pillars and a fat man blowing air up underneath the mountain which makes the pillars just strong enough to hold things up. When the fat man becomes out of breathe (aka US stimulus funds run out)the mountain (our economy) will fall. 2008 was an earthquake, not a mountain dropping from the sky.
Click to expand...


That's not exactly something that anyone needed John Titor to come back from 2036 to tell us. Warnings of financial meltdown existed well before Titor ever showed up. Some 'biblical scholars' such as Hal Lindsey were predicting coming gloom ( Armageddon, even ) as far back as the early 70s. There's absolutely nothing that Titor 'predicted' ( and mostly got wrong ) that was not already being predicted by the gloom merchants.....or didn't already have a book like Alas Babylon to go by. If Titor had specifically forecast 911, or a black president, or the Columbia disaster, or any of hundreds of other notable news events since 2000......then one might have something to go by.
 
Problem of "many worlds" theory I personally see is that if such would exist on the premise that every possible outcome would play out exists as it's own universe, is that then there is no free will. That is already on the top of the fact that the premise of "every possible outcome" seems ridiculous when you look at the physical universe on a quantum scale and you have these tiny bits moving around (or quantum tunneling) where it could move one way and not another.

In such a "every possible outcome a full universe exists" you would have a million different parallel universes just from microseconds of existence where particles went one way and not another...that doesn't even start to move into electrons or atom sized...let alone peoples choices.

More than one parallel physical universe may exist (time line or no time line), but it has to have some other "natural law" governing creation of new "universe".
 
Back
Top