Parallel Universes · HackerPapers discussions

Parallel Universes — mentioned by Jach

Thu, 20 Aug 2020 17:30:34 GMT

Thanks, I'll also watch it later. It initially reminded me of Tegmark's levels of parallel universes (http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0302131) whose highest is one that assumes mathematical reality is the same as physical reality.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Parallel Universes — mentioned by Jach

Fri, 27 Jul 2018 19:04:16 GMT

What do you mean by an "event horizon"? If you're a physicist I would expect you to drill down to the math and assumptions and theorems, not just English, but as I'm not a physicist you don't need to humor me even if you are one. Still supposing you did, would what you mean jive with our best known physical theories? What sorts of implications[0] to the actual observable cosmos would there be which are comfortable and uncomfortable? To a layman there's not much ambiguity. And so things a layman would recognize as describing a "black hole" were posited before general relativity existed, but if…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Parallel Universes — mentioned by Jach

Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:25:46 GMT

No. Check out http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0302131

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Parallel Universes — mentioned by Jach

Mon, 27 Aug 2012 04:35:31 GMT

> can't predict it This is the one a lot of people miss out on. Standard theories predict several types of "other universes"--thus that question is answered from science's view, it's just not an answer people like. See http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0302131v1 for a general overview. "Containing unobservable entities does clearly not per se make a theory non-testable."

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.