Multiverse and observational evidence?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter apostolosdt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Evidence Multiverse
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the multiverse theory and its relation to cosmic microwave background (CMB) measurements, particularly focusing on a model proposed by cosmologist Laura Mersini-Houghton. Participants express curiosity and skepticism about the claims made in a recent article regarding potential verification of this model through CMB data.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express caution regarding "exotic" theories like the multiverse, with one participant stating a personal bias against such theories.
  • There is confusion about the statement that the CMB is created during the separation of universes, with participants questioning the interpretation of this process.
  • One participant critiques the notion of "verification" of the multiverse model, arguing that the data merely shows indistinguishability from standard inflation models rather than definitive support for the multiverse.
  • Another participant shares an abstract from a paper discussing observational limits on a proposed model of the string landscape in inflation, noting that it finds no evidence for observable modulations to the power spectrum from landscape entanglement.
  • Some participants seek clarification on the relationship between the CMB, inflation, and the timeline of the Big Bang, expressing uncertainty about the sequence of events.
  • There is mention of increased attention to Mersini-Houghton’s work, possibly due to the publication of her recent book.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express skepticism and confusion regarding the claims made about the multiverse model and its verification through CMB measurements. Multiple competing views remain, particularly regarding the interpretation of the CMB's creation and the implications of the data presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the relationship between multiverse theories, inflation, and CMB measurements. There are unresolved questions about the definitions and implications of terms like "verification" in the context of cosmological models.

apostolosdt
Messages
178
Reaction score
204
Cosmology and multiverse are beyond my limited knowledge, but I came across the following article that aroused my curiosity. Although I am extremely cautious with "exotic" theories, I'd like to read any comments on that part of the article that a model proposed by cosmologist Laura Mersini-Houghton has found some sort of verification in CMB measurements.
https://www.theguardian.com/science...ersini-houghton-before-the-big-bang-interview
 
Space news on Phys.org
apostolosdt said:
Cosmology and multiverse are beyond my limited knowledge, but I came across the following article that aroused my curiosity. Although I am extremely cautious with "exotic" theories, I'd like to read any comments on that part of the article that a model proposed by cosmologist Laura Mersini-Houghton has found some sort of verification in CMB measurements.
https://www.theguardian.com/science...ersini-houghton-before-the-big-bang-interview
I don't understand

"When the process of separation [of universes] happens, that’s the point when the cosmic microwave background (CMB) is created"

I thought that was OUR Universe, decoupling?

@Orodruin @PeterDonis @phinds lots of others but those for now
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
I hope other more knowledgeable folks will chime in but I have two comments. First, I abhore all the multiverse theories but that's a personal preference/opinion. Second, I find her comment "When the process of separation [of universes] happens, that’s the point when the cosmic microwave background (CMB) is created." to be just weird. The CMB is just the Surface of Last Scattering and is not something that happened like flipping a light switch but rather something that occurred over a significant amount of time (in human terms anyway, not so much is cosmological terms but still, NOT instantaneous). How that can translate to a "decoupling of universes" does not make sense to me but again, I'm biased against such theories.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke, apostolosdt, pinball1970 and 1 other person
I guess, it's just an example that even serious newspapers tend to emphasize esoterics also in scientific news. That's of course much simpler than trying to explain the research to laymen in a proper way. It's only quite disturbing that the scientist in this case obviously approved this kind of statements within her interview. Does anybody know, to which research paper this new coverage refers to?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke and pinball1970
vanhees71 said:
I guess, it's just an example that even serious newspapers tend to emphasize esoterics also in scientific news. That's of course much simpler than trying to explain the research to laymen in a proper way. It's only quite disturbing that the scientist in this case obviously approved this kind of statements within her interview. Does anybody know, to which research paper this new coverage refers to?
I don’t know why the sudden attention now, but this paper from 2019 appears to be the one being discussed:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.10833
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke, apostolosdt, PeroK and 2 others
Although I don't understand any details of string theory or the landscape multiverse this sounds much more scientific than the Guardian article suggests, as expected. Maybe somebody with more expertise on string theory can evaluate this in more detail.
 
apostolosdt said:
a model proposed by cosmologist Laura Mersini-Houghton has found some sort of verification in CMB measurements
"Verification" is too strong. All this really amounts to is "for this particular data, our multiverse model's predictions happen to be indistinguishable from those of standard non-multiverse inflation models, so we can say we match the data as well as they do".

What would actually count as "verification" is something like "for this particular data, our model makes a correct prediction and other models make an incorrect prediction". No multiverse model has done that, nor do I expect one to any time soon.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke, vanhees71, apostolosdt and 2 others
apostolosdt said:
I'd like to read any comments on that part of the article that a model proposed by cosmologist Laura Mersini-Houghton has found some sort of verification in CMB measurements.
https://www.theguardian.com/science...ersini-houghton-before-the-big-bang-interview

The abstract from

https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.00672

by Will Kinney:

"We consider observational limits on a proposed model of the string landscape in inflation. In this scenario, effects from the decoherence of entangled quantum states in long-wavelength modes in the universe result in modifications to the Friedmann Equation and a corresponding modification to inflationary dynamics. Previous work by Holman, Mersini-Houghton, and Takahashi suggested that such effects could provide an explanation for well-known anomalies in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), such as the lack of power on large scales and the "cold spot" seen by both the WMAP and Planck satellites. In this paper, we compute limits on these entanglement effects from the Planck CMB data combined with the BICEP/Keck polarization measurement, and find no evidence for observable modulations to the power spectrum from landscape entanglement, and no sourcing of observable CMB anomalies."
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, apostolosdt and PeroK
George Jones said:
The abstract from

https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.00672

by Will Kinney:

"We consider observational limits on a proposed model of the string landscape in inflation. In this scenario, effects from the decoherence of entangled quantum states in long-wavelength modes in the universe result in modifications to the Friedmann Equation and a corresponding modification to inflationary dynamics. Previous work by Holman, Mersini-Houghton, and Takahashi suggested that such effects could provide an explanation for well-known anomalies in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), such as the lack of power on large scales and the "cold spot" seen by both the WMAP and Planck satellites. In this paper, we compute limits on these entanglement effects from the Planck CMB data combined with the BICEP/Keck polarization measurement, and find no evidence for observable modulations to the power spectrum from landscape entanglement, and no sourcing of observable CMB anomalies."
Can you say some or all of that so I can understand a little bit better please George? I am not a physicist.
Edit. Is the CMBR a certain amount of time after the big bang, 300,000 years?
And, I thought inflation was fractions of after the BB. Multiverses after that?
 
Last edited:
  • #11
George Jones said:
The abstract from

https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.00672

by Will Kinney:

"We consider observational limits on a proposed model of the string landscape in inflation. In this scenario, effects from the decoherence of entangled quantum states in long-wavelength modes in the universe result in modifications to the Friedmann Equation and a corresponding modification to inflationary dynamics. Previous work by Holman, Mersini-Houghton, and Takahashi suggested that such effects could provide an explanation for well-known anomalies in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), such as the lack of power on large scales and the "cold spot" seen by both the WMAP and Planck satellites. In this paper, we compute limits on these entanglement effects from the Planck CMB data combined with the BICEP/Keck polarization measurement, and find no evidence for observable modulations to the power spectrum from landscape entanglement, and no sourcing of observable CMB anomalies."
While this is relevant to the overall history of this discussion, this paper is from 3 years before Mersini-Houghton's latest model from the paper I linked above.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K