Multiverse (paradox?)

  • Thread starter hbi99
  • Start date

ComplexVar89

Gold Member
21
9
Not a THEORY that there might be or has to be put proof that there is.
"Substantiation" would be a better word here, I believe, since nothing is ever "proven" in science (unlike mathematics.) Even a theory that has been substantiated many, many times before can be found to be incomplete or just plain wrong by one repeatable observation or experiment or even the discovery of a flaw in the underlying mathematical models (which is possible, since many physical theories rely on approximate mathematical models.)
 

phinds

Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
15,416
5,050
"Substantiation" would be a better word here, I believe, since nothing is ever "proven" in science (unlike mathematics.) Even a theory that has been substantiated many, many times before can be found to be incomplete or just plain wrong by one repeatable observation or experiment or even the discovery of a flaw in the underlying mathematical models (which is possible, since many physical theories rely on approximate mathematical models.)
Yes, you are right, that is a more appropriate concept. To really get down to it, your phrasing is acceptable in science and mine isn't. Thanks. for that correction.

I think you'll agree that the POINT I was making is valid but I made it poorly.
 

ComplexVar89

Gold Member
21
9
I think you'll agree that the POINT I was making is valid but I made it poorly.
Yes. Yes, it was.
 
615
35
So the logic is the same as with alternative worlds in MWI.
I mean, people can have different points of view, but logic should be self-consistent: one can't accept the existence of baby universes because "extra assumption is required to remove" baby universes and at the same time deny MWI, right? Alternatively, if one denies MWI for "having extra undetectable stuff", that person should also deny the existence of the Multiverse, right?
Unfortunatelty it's not that simple. This is really a question of the philosophy of science and philosophy isn't something that goes down to well on this forum, but falsifiablity is something that does crop up quite a lot here and there seems to be a misnomer that it can be used to seperate science and pseudo-science, so it's worth saying a little about it so that it can be followed up elsewhere by anyone who is interested.

What you're asking for, is a solution to the Demarcation Problem, which is a good place to start if you want to understand this properly. It has been debated for a very long time. Falsifiablity was one proposed solution, designed to take the lessons learned from pure sciences such as physics in order to apply them in other disciplines. It captures a large part of the essence of pure science, but unfortunately it can't be used as a rule. Physicists rarely have cause to consider this, since the utility of ideas is debated on merit, within the community without need to address them in such philosophical terms.
 
Last edited:

Related Threads for: Multiverse (paradox?)

Replies
8
Views
10K
  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
816
  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Posted
2
Replies
28
Views
8K
  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Posted
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Posted
Replies
0
Views
2K

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top