Does this article prove that parallel universes exist

[john88888]

Does this article prove that parallel universes exist...

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-scientists-evidence-universes.html

Yes. no or to early to say

Can you please keep your answers simple I am not very advanced in physics thanks in advance

 

[Calimero]

It is journalistic article, and it can't, by itself, prove or disprove anything. What authors can do, and it seems that they are doing it fairly correct, is to inform public about current efforts in cosmology. Bit of sensationalistic approach is necessary in their line of work. If you read it once again, you should notice following:

Still, the scientists acknowledge that it is rather easy to find a variety of statistically unlikely properties in a large dataset like the CMB. The researchers emphasize that more work is needed to confirm this claim, which could come in short time from the Planck satellite, which has a resolution three times better than that of WMAP (where the current data comes from), as well as an order of magnitude greater sensitivity.

So, to answer your question - to early to say.

 

[Chronos]

Agreed, too early to tell. The statistical significance of the 'rings' is an open question.

 

[marcus]

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/planck/planck20100317.html
"Cosmology results on the first two years' worth of data are expected to be released in Dec. 2012."

My understanding is that Planck will make 4 complete scans of the sky, ending in early 2012. then you have to allow time to analyze the data. I don't know what will come after that.

Maybe there will be preliminary reports available before December 2012. But we might have to wait until December 2012 to know what the cosmology implications are of the first batch of Planck data.

Personally I think it is very unlikely that the "rings" will hold up. And I don't think Penrose "conformal cyclic" cosmology scheme has much chance of being confirmed.
But I'm glad that Penrose put this out on the table and is getting it talked about. It is one of several competing "before-bang" ideas that make different predictions about what we should be able to see (with Planck or improved instruments) in the CMB.

There is a paper by Wen Zhao et al. discussing this, also one by Aurelien Barrau et al. If anyone hasn't seen them and wants links, just ask.