B Does the multiverse really include ALL outcomes?

[Suekdccia]

In multiverse theory, where it is supposed to describe ALL outcomes, a mathematical multiverse is the ultimate ensemble and there are not more levels than this, but it doesn't contain all the imaginable universes because, as Max Tegmark himseld quoted in a paper "the mathematical universe hypothesis does certainly not imply that all imaginable universes exist. We humans can imagine many things that are mathematically undefined and hence do not correspond to mathematical structures".

Where would these universes exist in the multiverse theory if there are not more levels than the level iv (universes described by mathematics)? What theory exists for them? Are they just impossible (and because of that there is not any part in the multiverse theory that describe these universes)?

http://lesswrong.com/lw/1zt/the_mathematical_universe_the_map_that_is_the/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

 

[Chronos]

This is typical of the baggage endemic to multiverse models. It's not unlike the paradox posed by an omnipotent deity unable to create an immovable object. Science is firmly based upon repeatability, reproducibility and observability - virtues which multiverses often hold in contempt. Best served with a steaming boat of fairy dust infused imaginavy.

 

[PeterDonis]

Multiverse theory is speculative. Discussion of a particular peer-reviewed paper exploring it might be ok, but general discussion based on pop science sources is not.

Thread closed.