It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

IF the multiverse exists is there a golden probability?

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
if the many worlds interpretations of quantum mechanics were true and there were a so called infinite number of other realities,
Then in one of these realities is it possible that someone came back in time to create the multiverse if the hadron collider produces so called mini big bangs whats stopping us through science and quantum mechanics from producing the reality we see today.

Is it possible that there is one reality out there where god was able to create himself from the future and if so would there be a scientific messiah or God? For example lets Say God is sitting at his computer in the present moment reading this post...When they make breakthrough scientific discoveries about time space matter light and parralel realities he could have the technology to oneday live forever and also to go back with technology to start the initial event of the creation of the universe.

Could there be a scientific God?




posted on Jun, 7 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   
could the "gods" be humans from the future and the ultimate truth is humans made in the image of themselves.
What if thats what the ufo phenomenon was actually time travellers as well as thats where the ancient technologically advanced ancient civilizations came from?

or humans from another universe?
edit on 7-6-2016 by Belcastro because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Belcastro

Could there be a scientific God?

or humans from another universe?

*scratching my head a little bit* But I've tried to learn to not say 'never', 'impossible' and the such, so I'll begin by saying YES, your postulations are possible.

Now the one question that trips me up all the time is......if there is a God, where did he/it come from? In another question that trips me up is that if the Big Bang happened, what was before that? And where did that come from?

So, I get confused and it turns into a never ending circle. That is because WE earthlings still have SO much to learn, know and do before we will ever comprehend these questions. IMHO.

One last observation, I understand the discussion that says maybe our planet was visited by Aliens who created us in their likeness, hung around for a while, we called them gods. They took off after a while because they got bored with the experiment, but come back every now and then just for laughs to see how much we have screwed up. LOL

But of course, if that were true, then the circle continues: Where'd they come from? etc. Peace



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Belcastro

if there are infinite multiverses then inevitably in one of them someone has figured out how to destroy all of them.
yet here we still are, so cant be true.
edit on 6/8/16 by pryingopen3rdeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 07:00 AM
link   
I don't know, but your imagination is awesome. This is way better than political crap! S&F



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: Belcastro

if there are infinite multiverses then inevitably in one of them someone has figured out how to destroy all of them.
yet here we still are, so cant be true.


First random thought that really blows a hole in the multiverse.



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: bknapple32

thank you thank you, ill be here all week.

just in case someone wants to declare it must mean it isnt physically possible to destroy the multiverse, then that line of thought can go through multiple different scenarios to exemplify the same thing, someone in one of them would find a way to travel between the different universes enlightening everyone in all of them with how to end all suffering etc, yet hasnt happened.
there would inevitably be a verse in which traveling to other verses is a tourist attraction of sorts, yet we see no mutliverse tourists around.
and on and on.



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: bknapple32

thank you thank you, ill be here all week.

just in case someone wants to declare it must mean it isnt physically possible to destroy the multiverse, then that line of thought can go through multiple different scenarios to exemplify the same thing, someone in one of them would find a way to travel between the different universes enlightening everyone in all of them with how to end all suffering etc, yet hasnt happened.
there would inevitably be a verse in which traveling to other verses is a tourist attraction of sorts, yet we see no multiverse tourists around.
and on and on.


Unless that person is...god? Or perhaps it proves that there are rules within the multiverse we arent aware of yet (despite the knowledge that all things are possible in a multiverse)
edit on 8-6-2016 by bknapple32 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: bknapple32
Unless that person is...god? Or perhaps it proves that there are rules within the multiverse we arent aware of yet (despite the knowledge that all things are possible in a multiverse)


ya multiverse rules is kinda antithesis to the multiverse theory,
say one event wants to attempt to defy supposed rule, multiverse theory would dictate that one verse fails but another succeeds.
if there is something capable of completely preventing that one succeeding fraction of verse from occuring that same thing could more simply just limit all of creation into one single verse.
edit on 6/8/16 by pryingopen3rdeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

although there is one sort of theory i have heard that kinda allows for these explanations, it states that there is only one true universe but it has multiple shadows that there are mimic instances of it we would see as multiverses that exist only for a time, like the way a tree has only one center trunk, and each individual branch is thinner, weaker, shorter then the main trunk, and each branch is dependent on that trunk, originates from that trunk. and the trunk will survive if the branches are sheared off, but the branches wither and die without the trunk.



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

I think your last two posts, while slightly humorous, put giant holes in the multi-verse theory.

Perhaps we just need to accept this is our Universe, and our choices actually do matter and we have to live with those choices, instead of hoping "we got it right somewhere."

We as humans love to postulate Huge large Infinite Universes, because it saves us from the very humbling experience that we might actually matter as individuals, and aren't just a random mutation on a random planet, in a random solar system, in a random galaxy, in a random universe during a random time.



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
If the word UNIverse encompasses everything that exists into one word, multiverse is an impossibility as all those multis are still a part of the one universe and would be subverses of the universe.
edit on 8-6-2016 by LenatasataneL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: LenatasataneL

does that mean that only one unitard can exist in all of the earth? or that unicorns would be asexual reproducing with only themselves and dieing before birthing the next?

only saying your understanding of the word uni isnt right,

if there are multiverses you can still call each one a universe as each one is an completely isolated single individual system.

as far as a word that can encompass all universes i'd vote cosmos.

keep in mind language is an evolving thing that changes with our understanding of everything, if we came to decide universe was a lacking term it wouldn't threaten the existence of said universe it would just threaten the existence of the word and we would just rewrite its meaning or change what word we use.



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: LenatasataneL

does that mean that only one unitard can exist in all of the earth? or that unicorns would be asexual reproducing with only themselves and dieing before birthing the next?

only saying your understanding of the word uni isnt right,


You don't understand what universe means.

Uni means one. When talking about the Universe it means everything that exists throughout infinity in every direction. Uni was chosen to signify that everything in existence is being summed up in ONE word.

There can only be one Universe if it is everything that exists.



if there are multiverses you can still call each one a universe as each one is an completely isolated single individual system.

as far as a word that can encompass all universes i'd vote cosmos.

keep in mind language is an evolving thing that changes with our understanding of everything, if we came to decide universe was a lacking term it wouldn't threaten the existence of said universe it would just threaten the existence of the word and we would just rewrite its meaning or change what word we use.


I realize language evolves but cosmos doesn't include earth so that doesn't work.

Universe is a fact.

Multiverse is imaginary and unprovable.

So the definition of universe is still the entirety of everything, infinity.


edit on 8-6-2016 by LenatasataneL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: LenatasataneL

your just not really getting the multiverse concept, and thats ok it is pretty far out there, but "universe" as defined is "the universe : all of space and everything in it" in a multiverse reality a different universe would be separated, it would not even share the same "space". to each universe it is the only universe though other universes (may) exist it would be isolated in such a way as if the others didnt.

despite that metaphors often butcher concepts ill try one here.
on a single tv there is only ever one active channel, though the other channels are out there you can see just the one at a time, this is like us seeing one channel and saying it is all there is. sure its all we can see but others may still exist. imagine if we had chosen to instead call the first tv channel a unifeed, and upon our discovery of other channels or unifeeds we then call it the multifeed. we would have people like you declaring it cant be a multifeed the other feeds must just be portions of the same first unifeed because 'uni'. though that doesnt make sense since the other channels do not rely on the one we were first familiar with and arent even connected to it in anyway whatsoever.

also, multiverse theory isnt 100% imaginary and unprovable. there have been readings in scientific experiments which indicate (not prove) that multiverses may actually be correct, and it most certainly will be verifiable one way or the other eventually.

im not sure where you got the idea that the word cosmos excludes earth, it doesnt, earth is definitely apart of the cosmos.
edit on 6/8/16 by pryingopen3rdeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

I was thinking another dimension would be the equivalent. Not a 4th or 5th dimension but an altogether separate realm reachable by yet unknown means but possibly a black hole or similar concept.

I get the idea of infinity effecting time, space and realities, possibly everything in existence exists in infinite alternate realities.

Bizzarro world infinite times.

I get it I just think the name of theory makes it sound stupid.

Like the universe"expanding" which is deceptive because infinity isn't growing the galaxies are increasing in distance from one another within the universe in a distinct pattern.

I don't get why this is surprising I learned space was a vacuum in 1988. So matter is going to react to this effect one way or another.

I was taught then that if an astronaut went outside the shuttle without his suit he would explode. It was said because of the lack of pressure pushing in on the body that on earth is equal to the pressure the body naturally exerts. 4th grade this was.

But I have heard since that yes you would explode on t.v., but at a museum that no you wouldn't, radiation was the danger.

So I don't quite understand everything but I get the concept of the"multiverse" I just think it needs a better name. Theory of infinite realities? That's too frightening. Theory of multiple realities? Alternative realm theory?

I don't know.



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

I also think it is a part of the cosmos (earth) unless you are on it. This is the terrestrial area. To us the cosmos would be space, extra terrestrial.



posted on Jun, 8 2016 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Belcastro
Is it possible that there is one reality out there where god was able to create himself from the future and if so would there be a scientific messiah or God?

The nice thing about God is that you can define him/it anyway you want to.




top topics



 
5

log in

join