The something/universe from nothing theory has been propounded by the nihilistic Buddhists for over 2000 years. Modern science's new spin on it is just old wine in a new bottle. The fruit of the new scientific theory is getting papers published, lots of grant money and a cute undergraduate - ego, intellectual and sensual gratification. The fruit of the other is transcendence from the something/universe, which of course includes the theory itself The latter seems more noble
There are two big mailing lists about ensemble multiverse theory. The "Fabric of reality" (FOR) list at yahoo and the "Everything list" - google them if you're interested. Many well-know cosmologists and philosophers are on these lists. I'm on the everything list and very recently a member was published: http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks/docs/occam/ Abstract: Ensemble theories have received a lot of interest recently as a means of explaining a lot of the detailed complexity observed in reality by a vastly simpler description ``every possibility exists'' and a selection principle (Anthropic Principle) ``we only observe that which is consistent with our existence''. In this paper I show why, in an ensemble theory of the universe, we should be inhabiting one of the elements of that ensemble with least information content that satisfies the anthropic principle. This explains the effectiveness of aesthetic principles such as Occam's razor in predicting usefulness of scientific theories. I also show, with a couple of reasonable assumptions about the phenomenon of consciousness, the linear structure of quantum mechanics can be derived. Key words: Occam's razor, anthropic principle, ensemble theories, multiverse, failure of induction, foundation of quantum mechanics
This article is a great primer on the multiverse, it was published in Scientific American and is much easier to read that the last one I posted http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&articleID=000F1EDD-B48A-1E90-8EA5809EC5880000 the author's site: http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/
Hi All, I have never been impressed by all that has been posted about where or how or why we got there. Let's all use our trader's wisdom a little bit. Why do we care about where stock trading went on in Manhattan before they grew that walnut tree on Wall Street? I simply don't know and I don't care. What I care about is: what's XYZ going to do on Monday? Isn't this the kind of stuff that we should be good at. Now, all you amateur cosmologists, theologians, atheists and the like, post something about where we are going. If you don't think it is hot, type "end of times" or so in yahoo. Simply amazing! Would fit nicely in this chit/chat thread. nononsense
I enjoy the implication of QM that we are all immortal. Essentially, our parallel selves in the future who do not die are descendents of all the parallel realities including the one I'm in right now. Subsequently the measure (significance) of those histories which healthily live forever nudge my consciousness away from situations where I die. I may die in a universe that you're in, but I'll live on in others. If you dig a little deeper into multiverse theory you'll see how it makes predictions about the future.