Are We Each Creating Our Own Universe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Carpenter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a theory proposing that individual perceptions create personal universes, which intersect to form a shared reality. This concept suggests that reality is a complex tapestry woven from the interactions of these individual spheres. The original poster seeks logical or factual validation or refutation of this idea, emphasizing a desire for a scientific approach rather than a religious one. Participants engage in a debate about the philosophical nature of the theory, distinguishing it from physics. They argue that while physics relies on empirical evidence and nature's validation, philosophy allows for multiple interpretations and subjective acceptance of ideas. The conversation highlights the tension between speculative philosophical discussions and the scientific method, ultimately leading to the closure of the thread due to its speculative nature.
Carpenter
I would like someone to disprove or prove a weird theory I have been stuck on.

The universe boils down to an individuals perception, therefore, am I not generating my own universe? If I generate my own universe that means (I hope) that every other individual is generating there own universe. Reality would then be generated by the intersections of singular universes. For example: If all universes are spheres (crude but it will paint the picture), reality, the world I live in is generated by the intersections of multiple spheres created by family, friends and all the others I met in my life time. In turn, my families, friends and others reality is shaped by the other universes intersecting theirs. Reality is now a 3 dimensional chain mail or tapestry made up of billions of intersecting universes.

The reality we live in is built on the intersection of our spheres, the simplest building blocks (ideas) that everyone can agree on, logical and explainable. If our universe is only limited by our imaginations then should we not all be working on our minds? This means the human potential is nothing short of godly...

Scary and hopeful at the same time?

Sincerely

a Carpenter

Ps. not religious and looking for facts and logic. I came here for smart people. Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's not a physical idea but a philosophical one which means if you want to accept it,you can accept it and if you want to reject it,you can reject it!
 
Shyan,
I couldn't disagree with you more. There is a shift that we need to have in our science in order to advance. We keep looking towards the smallest of building blocks of our universes. If you looked at the atoms of the Great Wall of China would you see what those atoms made? This is a physics/philosophical question. What is the string theory? It is an idea which has not been proved. You can either believe it or not, try to prove or disprove it.

The question I pose is not a mere brain teaser but something I legitimately want answered. Tell me I'm crazy and give your explanation why. I have limited math and physics knowledge ( no degree). We have stoichiometry to explain that vinegar will react with baking soda. I'm looking for an equation to disprove the above idea.

Cheers
 
I didn't say you are crazy and I didn't say the idea you said isn't worth discussing. I just said it is not physics,it is philosophy! Some may say it is a question of philosophy of science, but that still is philosophy.
And in philosophy, things are much different than in physics.
In physics many ideas may be proposed but at last nature will decide one of them.
But in philosophy, many different, or even, opposing ideas may exist together for Hundreds of years, because there is only human mind and nothing like nature to tell you which idea is true or even whether there is only one true idea. So ,at least in my opinion, philosophy is somehow a matter of taste. Any idea that you like,you can accept. The question is not whether an idea is true or false, but only what are an ideas implications.
But from the physical point of view,the only thing I can say, is that the reductionism in physics isn't that anyone can reduce universe to anything s\he desires. Its only that anyone can suggest anything and the ones that fit, remain till nature rejects them one by one and choose one of them or maybe more.
The point that is always remembered in physics is that the universe doesn't care how are we looking at it so different theories or different formulations of a theory or different interpretations of a theory should give same results.Otherwise only one of them is right. So the laws of physics give you the same universe for any human, because we require them to do so.
 
Last edited:
Closed, pending moderation. This is also in the wrong forum.

Zz.
 
Sorry, we do not allow personal theories. We do not allow overly speculative (philosophical) threads. The thread is closed. (moved from Science Fiction & Fantasy)
 
Just ONCE, I wanted to see a post titled Status Update that was not a blatant, annoying spam post by a new member. So here it is. Today was a good day here in Northern Wisconsin. Fall colors are here, no mosquitos, no deer flies, and mild temperature, so my morning run was unusually nice. Only two meetings today, and both went well. The deer that was road killed just down the road two weeks ago is now fully decomposed, so no more smell. Somebody has a spike buck skull for their...
Thread 'RIP George F. Smoot III (1945-2025)'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Smoot https://physics.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/george-smoot-iii https://apc.u-paris.fr/fr/memory-george-fitzgerald-smoot-iii https://elements.lbl.gov/news/honoring-the-legacy-of-george-smoot/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2006/smoot/facts/ https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200611/nobel.cfm https://inspirehep.net/authors/988263 Structure in the COBE Differential Microwave Radiometer First-Year Maps (Astrophysical Journal...
Back
Top