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.

 

Multiverses/Universes

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:17 AM
link   
What are people's theories on the idea of a 'Multiverse'? I guess there are different types of multiverse, so I'll clarify some of them...a multiverse is a collection of universes...however there are different theories for them - they could be a bunch of parallel universes (a bunch of universes similar to each other all on top of one another - dimensionally speaking); they could be a choice universe, or a 'worldline' (as referred to by 'John Titor/timetravel_0' - an infinite number of parallel universes ever so slightly different from each other ie when a choice is made, it creates another universe - one where the decision goes one way and another when the decision goes the other).

Aside from multiverses there is also our common theory of a single finite universe with a beginning, end, shape and size.

There is also the idea of an infinite universe - one that has no beginning or end and goes on forever, meaning that in infinity anything happens and there is no need for the 'worldline' theory (this also means that any universes in the 'worldline' multiverse are finite).

Another theory I came across recently is the idea of the elevnth dimension - a long tube which contains multiple universes floating around (kind of like blood cells in a vein).

I personally think we're in an infinite universe.

Does anyone have any ideas on the kind of universe/multiverse we live in or any new theories?




posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:26 AM
link   
I had my own little theory thinking that ( I think I've actually heard of this somewhere before too) Black holes actually suck matter out of our own living Universe and spit them out outside our Universe and create tiny "baby" Universes, or in other words, a multiverse. I don't believe in the whol parallel thing where there's someone just like me there only he may be taller, or shorter, or gay, or straight or whatever ( got that from the movie, The One) I'm actually not sure what I believe in.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Black holes/white holes...
hmmm...never heard that one before. I guess it could happen, since the crap that goes into Black Holes has gotta come out somewhere...



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I think its most likely that we are part of an infinite cycle. Thats only my opinion. The only drawback to that conclusion, is everything MUST occur if this is true. Nothing cannot happen. I also find it odd that we experience "time" if it is infinite. Even with those problems, as of right now, I feel we are part of something infinite. Even if the universe itself isn't infinite.

As far as the parallel universe theory goes, I think that is just a tool some scientist used to grasp the concept of every possible outcome occuring. It does, though, make the universe finite. It also requires a start point. It appeals to the common visualization of infinity as well. (which is wrong) People tend to imagine infinity as something expanding. Infinity has no beginning, and no end. It is not expanding. It is already "expanded". So parallel universes splitting off at every possible decision point offer an expanding point of view.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I'm no scientist, far from that area actually. But I can and will specualte!

I've heard about the string theory--eleven dimensions. It seems to be a well-rounded theory of mathematics...so on. I'm more farmiliar with the multiworld...thanks to Titor, or whomever he is.

But it seems to be that all things become more abstract, as you carry them farther. Perhaps that is why many persons cannot fathom a finite...or infinite..or many worlds. I like to imagine the universe as a circle, but even that has boundaries. But I think,without reason mind you, that the outer limits are so abstract, they cannot be described, by either stranger mathematical forms or abstract describtions. But the human mind can grasp it...or rather perhaps the soul.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Time is a funny one...I've heard it said somewhere that there is no universal clock, as explained in the Twin Paradox (which i don't fully understand). Maybe time is an illusion that we created for ourselves...



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRenegade
Time is a funny one...I've heard it said somewhere that there is no universal clock, as explained in the Twin Paradox (which i don't fully understand). Maybe time is an illusion that we created for ourselves...


According to Relativity, there is no universal clock. Time is experienced only relative to the observer. That can mean a huge difference in extreme cases (like the twin paradox). It really isnt a hard concept to understand. You just have to be willing to understand it. It is only a theory, but it eliminated the possiblity of traveling faster than the speed of light. I do agree with that much for sure.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Time does not exsist without motion, or the other way around, and so on. Energy is in there somewhere. But Buckminster Fuller had some truely interesting work on the sort of geometry/nature sort. One could not move in a picture, a slab of time it is...frozen.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:40 AM
link   
I think time is just a kind of mental calander for humans. There was no "time" before humans arrived. We created it as a way to keep records and organize things.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:43 AM
link   
But what about everything before us? Wouldn't they need time to grow? Prosper? Exist?



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:44 AM
link   
I kind of agree there. I think that things happened and they happened in order, but we invented the concept of time...unless you look at the theory that time is relative to space, which I'm not sure entirely how it goes.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:48 AM
link   
If "Time is an actual thing... then where is the evidence? I'm not talking about a plant growing or human being born, groweing into an adult, then dieing. I'm talking about in actual space, where's the evidence of "Time". There is non. We invented time... we invented the 60 second, 60-minute, 24 hour, 365 day time calanders. We invented the arabic numbers not the cosmos, we determined how many seconds ther are in a minute, how many minutes in an hour and so on. we also determined how long these "Seconds" will be which effects minutes, hours, days, and years.

[Edited on 4-1-2004 by DarkHelmet]



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:52 AM
link   
I guess it could be said that we invented the scale for time as you said. It may actually be proven to be an actual thing, as time theoretically exists in the 'fourth dimension'. If we accept this, it means that we have evidence of time existing - we live in 3 physical dimensions and 1 time dimension. So I guess, actually time has always been there in the fourth dimension.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:54 AM
link   
We conceived on how to go about measuring time, which is any form you please. But time itself, I cannot guess. Where is it? Maybe it's that omipresent god, maybe it's everything. People look for god too, but cannot find any substance beside what's in their hearts.

I do not understand how time is theoretically in another dimension besides the 1-3 which allow for movement. If motion needs time, then everything is one!!

[Edited on 1/4/2004 by Requiem]



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 01:58 AM
link   

time has always been there in the fourth dimension.

I think If time IS anything it's definately that 4th dimension we've been looking for... or possobly a 5th if there is yet another dimension between them...



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 02:05 AM
link   
I saw this program on TV which explained the string theory. I wasn't fully following, but they explained that it had been mathematically proven that there are a total of eleven dimensions. I have no idea how they can come to that conclusion since we can only conceive a maximum if four.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 02:08 AM
link   
PBS? They say it was beautiful math. But still, it's only a theory.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 02:11 AM
link   
I read an article in my Discover magazine, saying something about how math is slowly becoming unreliable... If you want more details, I can get them for you sometime...



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 02:13 AM
link   
interesting...
how is that so though? Surly with time math would become more reliable?



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 02:15 AM
link   
I tell you! The further you go the more abstract things seem to become! I'll look out for the article around.

Plus, math is in our minds! Like words! The concepts lie underneath all the mess.

[Edited on 1/4/2004 by Requiem]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join