BrainMeta'   Connectomics'  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> What If There Is Only One Universe?
Trip like I do
post Jun 06, 2009, 07:07 PM
Post #1


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



When it comes to universes, perhaps one is enough after all.

Many theories in physics and cosmology require the existence of alternate, or parallel, universes. But Dr. Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, explains the flaws of theories that suggest our universe is just one of many, and which also perpetuate the notion that time does not exist. Smolin, author of the bestselling science book The Trouble with Physics and a founding member of the Perimeter Institute, explains his views in the June issue of Physics World.

Smolin explains how theories describing a myriad of possible universes, or a multiverse, with many dimensions and particles and forces have become more popular in the last few years. However, through his work with the Brazilian philosopher Roberto Mangabeira Unger, Smolin believes that multiverse theories, which imply that time is not a fundamental concept, are profoundly mistaken

Smolin says a timeless multiverse means our laws of physics can be determined from experiment. And he explains the unclear connection between fundamental laws, which are unique and applicable universally, and effective laws, which hold based on what we can actually observe.

Smolin suggests new principles that rethink the notion of physical law to apply to a single universe. These principles say there is only one universe; that all that is real is real in a moment, as part of a succession of moments; and that everything real in each moment is a process of change leading to future moments. As he explains, If there is just one universe, there is no reason for a separation into laws and initial conditions, as we want a law to explain just one history of one universe.

He hopes these principles will bring a fresh adventure in science.

If we accept there is only one universe and that time is a fundamental property of nature, then this opens up the possibility that the laws of physics evolve with time. As Smolin writes, The notion of transcending our time-bound experiences in order to discover truths that hold timelessly is an unrealizable fantasy. When science succeeds, we do nothing of the sort; what we physicists really do is discover laws that hold in the universe we experience within time. This, I would claim, should be enough; anything beyond that is more a religious urge for transcendence than science.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GodConsciousness
post Jun 07, 2009, 04:17 AM
Post #2


Demi-God
*****

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 865
Joined: Sep 19, 2006
Member No.: 5683



I have a feeling it will be some time before scientists definitively determine whether or not there is a multiverse. Call it a yearning for some kind of transcendence, but even if we do accept the big bang theory of a single universe, I am still left with the question: where did the initial particles and elements that brought forth the big bang come from? Another universe? A transcendent intelligence? The first moments of the universe's causal chain remains a profound mystery.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Jun 07, 2009, 10:38 AM
Post #3


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



I'm intrigued by the following statement from the above text....

"the laws of physics evolve with time"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Jun 10, 2009, 10:56 AM
Post #4


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



There is only one universe - the mind ...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jun 10, 2009, 12:33 PM
Post #5


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



QUOTE(GodConsciousness @ Jun 07, 2009, 05:17 AM) *

I have a feeling it will be some time before scientists definitively determine whether or not there is a multiverse.

I think that it may be impossible to ever know.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
code buttons
post Jun 10, 2009, 04:28 PM
Post #6


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 2450
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Member No.: 4556



QUOTE(Rick @ Jun 10, 2009, 12:33 PM) *

QUOTE(GodConsciousness @ Jun 07, 2009, 05:17 AM) *

I have a feeling it will be some time before scientists definitively determine whether or not there is a multiverse.

I think that it may be impossible to ever know.

Always the optimistic!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jun 10, 2009, 05:01 PM
Post #7


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



Somebody's got to damp down the overly-rampant enthusiasm!

But really, to paraphrase Clint Eastwood, a species has to know its limitations.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
code buttons
post Jun 10, 2009, 05:05 PM
Post #8


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 2450
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Member No.: 4556



QUOTE(Rick @ Jun 10, 2009, 05:01 PM) *

... a species has to know its limitations...

But how can we know it unless we keep pushing the boundaries!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GodConsciousness
post Jun 11, 2009, 04:18 AM
Post #9


Demi-God
*****

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 865
Joined: Sep 19, 2006
Member No.: 5683



There may be no limit to what can be known. We are witnessing the fruits of evolved intelligence over the past 14 billion years or so of the universe's history. Who knows how far intelligence will evolve in another 15 billion years or trillion years. The future of the universe, mind, and intelligence appears potentially infinite.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Jun 11, 2009, 12:18 PM
Post #10


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(GodConsciousness @ Jun 11, 2009, 01:18 PM) *

There may be no limit to what can be known. We are witnessing the fruits of evolved intelligence over the past 14 billion years or so of the universe's history. Who knows how far intelligence will evolve in another 15 billion years or trillion years. The future of the universe, mind, and intelligence appears potentially infinite.
What exactly IS intelligence? I mean, 14 billion years of the universe's history has also led to present day ants that have been equally successful as humans in terms of overall survival, species diversity, numbers of individuals and so on. They don't read books, pontificate on multiverses or look at their watches. Are THEY intelligent?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
code buttons
post Jun 11, 2009, 12:47 PM
Post #11


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 2450
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Member No.: 4556



QUOTE(Hey Hey @ Jun 11, 2009, 12:18 PM) *

QUOTE(GodConsciousness @ Jun 11, 2009, 01:18 PM) *

There may be no limit to what can be known. We are witnessing the fruits of evolved intelligence over the past 14 billion years or so of the universe's history. Who knows how far intelligence will evolve in another 15 billion years or trillion years. The future of the universe, mind, and intelligence appears potentially infinite.
What exactly IS intelligence? I mean, 14 billion years of the universe's history has also led to present day ants that have been equally successful as humans in terms of overall survival, species diversity, numbers of individuals and so on. They don't read books, pontificate on multiverses or look at their watches. Are THEY intelligent?

Plus it took us (is it 2 or 3?) billion years for life to figure out how to go from single to multicell organisms.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Jun 11, 2009, 04:40 PM
Post #12


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



QUOTE(code buttons @ Jun 11, 2009, 04:47 PM) *

QUOTE(Hey Hey @ Jun 11, 2009, 12:18 PM) *

QUOTE(GodConsciousness @ Jun 11, 2009, 01:18 PM) *

There may be no limit to what can be known. We are witnessing the fruits of evolved intelligence over the past 14 billion years or so of the universe's history. Who knows how far intelligence will evolve in another 15 billion years or trillion years. The future of the universe, mind, and intelligence appears potentially infinite.
What exactly IS intelligence? I mean, 14 billion years of the universe's history has also led to present day ants that have been equally successful as humans in terms of overall survival, species diversity, numbers of individuals and so on. They don't read books, pontificate on multiverses or look at their watches. Are THEY intelligent?

Plus it took us (is it 2 or 3?) billion years for life to figure out how to go from single to multicell organisms.

.... with most thinkers from the current evolutionary stage of the human species still mired in outdated temporal modes, repeatedly asking the same questions over and over, never finding they're enlightening answers! Many may benefit from re-thinking the questions they ask, how they ask them, and from which angles they're asked!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Jun 11, 2009, 04:42 PM
Post #13


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



QUOTE(Trip like I do @ Jun 07, 2009, 02:38 PM) *

I'm intrigued by the following statement from the above text....

"the laws of physics evolve with time"

.... I'm still intrigued by this statement!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Jun 12, 2009, 03:42 AM
Post #14


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Trip like I do @ Jun 12, 2009, 01:42 AM) *

QUOTE(Trip like I do @ Jun 07, 2009, 02:38 PM) *

I'm intrigued by the following statement from the above text....

"the laws of physics evolve with time"

.... I'm still intrigued by this statement!
The Velocity of Light and the Age of the Universe, Part 1, Ex Nihilo vol. 4, no. 1, 1981
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Jun 13, 2009, 01:18 PM
Post #15


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/c-decay.html

the decay of c-decay

"If you propose that the universe and all in it is the product of an act of creation only 6-7000 years ago, many people ask - 'How is it that objects millions of light years away can be seen? Surely such light would take millions of years to reach us.'"

- Barry Setterfield, "The Velocity of Light and the Age of the Universe, Part 1," Ex Nihilo, vol. 4, no. 1, 1981

The above quote is, to my knowledge, the first salvo by Australian creationist Barry Setterfield regarding his hypothesis of "c-decay," the notion of the decreasing speed of light that has been used for years as evidence for a young universe. Setterfield's hypothesis, while initially embraced by the majority of the creationist community, received heavy criticism from the scientific establishment for several years since its introduction in 1981, and was finally rejected by the creationists themselves after it became such a major embarrassment that even the San Diego-based Institute for Creation Research rejected it


.... not quite where my mind is going with that statement!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
P.j.S
post Jun 14, 2009, 03:29 PM
Post #16


Overlord
****

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 358
Joined: Jun 12, 2009
Member No.: 32189



If the laws of physics are evolving with time does that mean that time cannot go backwards?
So much for a single universe theory. How about a single universe with time and season dimensions?

If you go 10 miles in 1 second and then 200 miles in a second, at the same time, then from an overview of a single combined 1 second interval the original 10 mile mark would be at 1/20th per/second mark, with a steady rate of speed for the duration of the second. Did time for the original 10 mi/sec go backwards?

0------------------>| 10 miles in 1 sec.
0------------------>| 200 miles in 1 sec.
0->|<--------------| 200 miles in 1 sec.
-->10 miles in 1/20th sec. in forward time or is it 10 mi/sec pushed back by forward time to a 1/20th per sec mark?
To the observer it looks like the 10 mile/sec mark is being pushed back to zero.

And I live in the same universe that you do! hee! hee!

Therefore at the 1/20th mark in real forward time again at 10 miles per second speed it would take 20 seconds to elapse the history of the exercise. But the exercise is also played out in the real time of 200 miles/sec. Or just 1 second of time. I call the example of real elapsed time with the 20 second expenditure within the real time of the current second "a parsec" of the current real time.

All Rights Reserved!
The Theory of Space 0/0 Dynamics by PJS
Peter Jeffrey Spencer
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Nov 30, 2009, 06:11 PM
Post #17


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



.... are the laws of physics about to evolve with time
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Nov 30, 2009, 07:09 PM
Post #18


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE(Trip like I do @ Jun 07, 2009, 03:07 AM) *

When it comes to universes, perhaps one is enough after all.

Many theories in physics and cosmology require the existence of alternate, or parallel, universes. But Dr. Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, explains the flaws of theories that suggest our universe is just one of many, and which also perpetuate the notion that time does not exist. Smolin, author of the bestselling science book ‘The Trouble with Physics’ and a founding member of the Perimeter Institute, explains his views in the June issue of Physics World.

Smolin explains how theories describing a myriad of possible universes, or a “multiverse”, with many dimensions and particles and forces have become more popular in the last few years. However, through his work with the Brazilian philosopher Roberto Mangabeira Unger, Smolin believes that multiverse theories, which imply that time is not a fundamental concept, are “profoundly mistaken”.

Smolin says a timeless multiverse means our laws of physics can’t be determined from experiment. And he explains the unclear connection between fundamental laws, which are unique and applicable universally, and effective laws, which hold based on what we can actually observe.

Smolin suggests new principles that rethink the notion of physical law to apply to a single universe. These principles say there is only one universe; that all that is real is real in a moment, as part of a succession of moments; and that everything real in each moment is a process of change leading to future moments. As he explains, “If there is just one universe, there is no reason for a separation into laws and initial conditions, as we want a law to explain just one history of one universe.”

He hopes these principles will bring a fresh adventure in science.

If we accept there is only one universe and that time is a fundamental property of nature, then this opens up the possibility that the laws of physics evolve with time. As Smolin writes, “The notion of transcending our time-bound experiences in order to discover truths that hold timelessly is an unrealizable fantasy. When science succeeds, we do nothing of the sort; what we physicists really do is discover laws that hold in the universe we experience within time. This, I would claim, should be enough; anything beyond that is more a religious urge for transcendence than science.”
Are you sure there's even one? http://stupidevilbastard.com/index/wiki/Fi...xperiment2.pdf/
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Nov 30, 2009, 07:48 PM
Post #19


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



QUOTE(Hey Hey @ Nov 30, 2009, 10:09 PM) *

QUOTE(Trip like I do @ Jun 07, 2009, 03:07 AM) *

When it comes to universes, perhaps one is enough after all.

Many theories in physics and cosmology require the existence of alternate, or parallel, universes. But Dr. Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, explains the flaws of theories that suggest our universe is just one of many, and which also perpetuate the notion that time does not exist. Smolin, author of the bestselling science book ‘The Trouble with Physics’ and a founding member of the Perimeter Institute, explains his views in the June issue of Physics World.

Smolin explains how theories describing a myriad of possible universes, or a “multiverse”, with many dimensions and particles and forces have become more popular in the last few years. However, through his work with the Brazilian philosopher Roberto Mangabeira Unger, Smolin believes that multiverse theories, which imply that time is not a fundamental concept, are “profoundly mistaken”.

Smolin says a timeless multiverse means our laws of physics can’t be determined from experiment. And he explains the unclear connection between fundamental laws, which are unique and applicable universally, and effective laws, which hold based on what we can actually observe.

Smolin suggests new principles that rethink the notion of physical law to apply to a single universe. These principles say there is only one universe; that all that is real is real in a moment, as part of a succession of moments; and that everything real in each moment is a process of change leading to future moments. As he explains, “If there is just one universe, there is no reason for a separation into laws and initial conditions, as we want a law to explain just one history of one universe.”

He hopes these principles will bring a fresh adventure in science.

If we accept there is only one universe and that time is a fundamental property of nature, then this opens up the possibility that the laws of physics evolve with time. As Smolin writes, “The notion of transcending our time-bound experiences in order to discover truths that hold timelessly is an unrealizable fantasy. When science succeeds, we do nothing of the sort; what we physicists really do is discover laws that hold in the universe we experience within time. This, I would claim, should be enough; anything beyond that is more a religious urge for transcendence than science.”
Are you sure there's even one? http://stupidevilbastard.com/index/wiki/Fi...xperiment2.pdf/

"stupid evil bastard".... nice link!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd September 2017 - 01:22 AM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

Consciousness Expansion · Brain Mapping · Neural Circuits · Connectomics  ·  Neuroscience Forum  ·  Brain Maps Blog
 · Connectomics · Connectomics  ·  shawn mikula  ·  shawn mikula  ·  articles