I really don't like how the multiverse theory has just become

>>7845464
>multiverse theory has just become a meme for fedora tipping plebs
that's what it is

>>7845519
Scientists are now fedora tipping plebs. Thanks /sci/

If you believe in Schrödinger's Cat, then there's multiple universes existing simultaneously for all quantum events. You can say that when we observe anything, the other universes don't exist, or maybe they do.

Or you can say that there were other big bangs in higher dimensions. The big bang was possibly just a quantum fluctuation.

>>7845464
>What are some good arguments that dismiss the muliverse?

They are about the same that dismiss the existence of god : there is absolutely no evidence.

>>7845464
I fear the people your talking about would be immune to a rational counterargument.
.. also fear that they are mostly on 4chan right now

>>7845464
No evidence, that's all.

If its impossible to gain any evidence, then its... pointless.

Meh, it's at least logically consistent, unlike christfag god claims. And it doesn't let you jump from that to making retarded decisions in the universe we inhabit.

>>7845464
Multiverse theory doesn't really answer anything. Let's assume it's true. If so, then where did all those universes come from?

What is "in between" the universes?

>>7846196
The answer might be that there is no between.

The only thing worse than fedora tipping plebs is failed philosophers like OP who make these awful threads.

No, there is no evidence for multiverse. None whatsoever. Most people can't even define what 'atom' means. There are things much smaller than atoms and I'm sure some are yet to be properly defined.

People are simply unqualified to reach a conclusion without first understanding our own physical laws i.e Space, time and the forces within. If you did, you would realize you don't need other universes.

File: InsideOut556500e6a2be0-2040.0.jpg (225KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1920x1080px

Is the multiverse theory really a scientific theory?
As far as i undersand, it is just a visual way to explain the collaps of wave function, like you would explain emotions as little people inside our head that take turn in piloting us

>>7846214
Quantum physics exists to explain lots of stuff. The multiverse is one of the consequences of quantum physics.

Multiverse theory rests on an axiom. The assumption that it is possible for a universe to unfold in more than one way.

Failing this assumption, all action is predetermined, and there is only one universe. Spacetime, the entirety of time and space in 4th-dimensional view, is the only thing in existence. There are no other possible configurations of spacetime.

Alternatively, granted our assumption, we are faced with an infinity on every level of the the unfolding of the universe, from very start to very end.

I'm not sure which which option is more crazy.

What bugs me about the traditional view of one universe is that the parameters for our physical laws are just right for life to exist.

Within a multiverse every single "universe" can have different parameters so there is no need for the "miracle" that life exists.

>>7847803
Good point, it is far easier to believe that life was inevitable within the grand scheme of infinity than to believe that it was somehow always predetermined within the single possible universe.

I feel like there's a paradox to be explored here though.

if its outside our universe(I.E. the area to which logic applies), and doesn't interact with us in any way, can it really be said to exist?

>>7847803
yeah its a lot easier to believe that either everything exists or nothing exists than only some stuff exists

>>7846239
How is that explanation of emotions even close to accurate. In my experience it's nothing like that. They're more like advisors of you're supposed to give an avatar.

>>7849309
Well it could also be the case that you reset at regular intervals and scramble the constants. This is (likely) just a pitifully small couple billion years in reality.

>>7845464
Maybe in an alternate universe, you already have the argument...

>>7849330
Yes but within infinite time, infinite forms of universal spacetime would be generated.

Then from the higher perspective of 4th dimension all would be seen to exist simultaneously.

>>7845734
>there's multiple universes existing simultaneously for all quantum events
That's one "interpretation" of QM.
It's not science, and it's not supported by observed facts.
It's really just a desperate attempt to reconcile actual scientific knowledge (QM) with your emotional need to believe that "God does not play dice with the universe".

>>7845994
>>7846133
THIS
https://www.google.com/#q=unfalsifiable

>>7847796
>>7847808
>>7849309
>>7849330
>>7849664
gibberish

>What are some good arguments that dismiss the muliverse?

Show me the physical evidence.

>>7845464
There are two basic types of multiverse: Open and closed. In a closed multiverse, each individual universe is isolated from all other universes and is functionally equivalent to a reality with only one universe. In an open/navigable multiverse, you can get from one universe to the next by *complicated navigation concept*. In a navigable multiverse, you can find travelers at literally any point in the entire multiverse. Since time is, by definition, not shared between universes, a multiversal traveler will show up with a probability of nearly 1 for any moment in time that an observer records.

TL;DR: We either don't live in a multiverse or else we'd see multiversal travelers like clockwork, every second of every day.

>>7845464
I really don't like how multiverse is confused with many-worlds

multiverse =/= many-worlds

>>7847022
no, QM exists to describe a lot of stuff. It sees how things spontaneously appear. It sees the double split experiment.

It then makes the assumptions that these things happen for no reason. It completely misses the point of predeterminism and the space-time/force manifold.

It's not falsifiable so you don't have to discuss it if you don't want to, a simple 'no' works.

>>7849700
You know, a lot of concepts in science seem like gibberish to me, but in truth I just can't grasp the concept.

>>7850329

This
This
This
FUCKING THIS

/sci/ once again proving it is nothing but fedora tippers except for this guy and me

Many-worlds is an interpretation of reality, due to quantum. The multiverse is a conjecture of how/from what did the Big Bang occur, due to cosmology. They are not the same. Keep your terms straight when discussing your reddit Kaku memes, you fucking fedoras.

>>7850329
>>7850754
Well if I'm not mistaken the many-worlds interpretation is a subset of multiverse ideas.

Either way they're both things we can't observe.

>>7850754
Oh cool. Now the blue/gold dress can be both colors and everyone can be happy.