High School Does a Probabilistic Multiverse Invalidate the Value of Scientific Inquiry?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether a fundamentally probabilistic universe, where all outcomes occur in a multiverse, undermines scientific inquiry. It asserts that scientific methods remain valid, as they can effectively utilize statistical approaches to understand probabilistic phenomena. The behavior of air molecules is cited as an example where randomness does not negate predictability on a larger scale. Confusion between the multiverse concept and the multi-world interpretation of quantum mechanics is noted, emphasizing their distinct meanings. Ultimately, the validity of scientific inquiry is maintained despite the probabilistic nature of reality.
Zehpyr
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Does science even matter if everything that can happen, does happen in some universe? Is what we learn just true for this universe, and meaningless everywhere else?
If the universe is fundamentally probabilistic, and all possible outcomes are realized in some branch of the multiverse, does that invalidate the concept of scientific inquiry? If knowledge is merely a description of one particular branch of reality, does it have any inherent value?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are starting from the premise that there is such a thing as a "multiverse". Maybe there is, maybe there isn't, but nothing in our current understanding of physics would be affected either way. Thus, speculation about the possibility is out of scope for this forum.

You may be confusing the multiverse notion with the "multi-world interpretation" (MWI) of quantum mechanics. That's something different - the confusion comes about because the word "world" in that context doesn't mean what it sounds like.

Nonetheless, in our current understanding of physics the universe is fundamentally probabilistic. This does not, however, invalidate the concept of scientific inquiry, it just requires the use of statistical methods to completely understand what is going on. For an example... the behavior of air molecules is completely random, yet we can predict with near-perfect accuracy the behavior of large crowds of them.
 
Zehpyr said:
does that invalidate the concept of scientific inquiry?
Why would it? Which specific step of the scientific method do you think is invalidated in a probabilistic universe?
 
I do not have a good working knowledge of physics yet. I tried to piece this together but after researching this, I couldn’t figure out the correct laws of physics to combine to develop a formula to answer this question. Ex. 1 - A moving object impacts a static object at a constant velocity. Ex. 2 - A moving object impacts a static object at the same velocity but is accelerating at the moment of impact. Assuming the mass of the objects is the same and the velocity at the moment of impact...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
1K
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K