reply to post by thrashee
No, there has to be a Source of All Things in order for these things to exist. There has to be something independent of time dependent universes.
Science just gives God different names just like religion. They call it the Bulk in M-Theory, The Wave Function of the Universe in Quantum Cosmology,
a superstring in string theory, hyperspace, superhologram, zero-point energy and MIT Professor Seth Lloyd calls the universe a quantum computer.
These are just different names for the Source of All Things. Religion does the same thing. They give the Source of All Things different names.
We can see some of the characteristics of the Source of All Things through things like quantum physics. We know this Source is everywhere at once. We
know this Source contains all probable states, this Source would be All Powerful because it's not bound by time or things like the Uncertainty
This Source would know the position and velocity of every subatomic particle so it would know everything throughout the multiverse.
The Source would be Heaven so to speak and perfect Symmetry would be there. It would be total coherence. This would mean all energy states would be
equal from each point of view. In the Source you would know everything because it's where every energy state exists.
If we go by what your saying thrashee, that would mean universes would pop up out of nothing at the same time. We know through things like
non-locality and entanglement that everything is connected. When things get bigger so to speak the connection becomes less apparent and this is
Science looks at things like gravity for instance. Why is gravity so weak? Look at the magnet. All the gravity on earth can't pull a magnet to the
ground. This small magnet on a fridge is more powerful than gravity.
It make sense when you talk about gravity sipping into our universe or brane from the bulk as Harvard Theoretical Physicist Lisa Randall talked about
in her excellent book Warped Passages. Gravity would be diluted so to speak and spread out on different brane worlds and the bulk. Gravity would not
be bound to these brane worlds like other subatomic particles. Gravity would be able to travel from brane to brane or different dimensions through
the hypothetical graviton or gravity waves.
So religion and Science are both describing the Source of All Things. One calls Him God the other the wave function of the universe.
Think about your computer and your TV. There both made up of the same thing but there seperate in our eyes. It's like a puzzle and the puzzle
pieces. The puzzle contains all of these pieces and paints a picture. When you remove the puzzle pieces then they are seperate and each piece is
seperated from the whole.
That's like us. We are the pieces who are under the illusion that we are it. We lose our connection to the whole because of decoherence. The
pieces are still connected by a Source or the Whole that would be omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent.
The Source would be aware also because the pieces are conscious of themselves.
This is why Deutsch likes parallel universes because it would take away the observer and all these events would have to occur at the same time because
events in one universe are the cause of events in other universes. So if you flipped a coin and it was tails that would mean in a parallel universe
another version of yourself would get heads.
With a time independent observer these two events do not need to happen parallel to each other because the observer can cause these events to occur
without the opposite events happening in parallel universes and this is exactly what Deutsch and others want to avoid.
They can't describe the Observer and that sounds like God.
[edit on 19-8-2008 by polomontana]