Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Parallel Universes Exist

  1. Sep 25, 2007 #1
    I am no physicist, but it sounds like this is pretty big. From the last paragraph, it sounds like a hypothesis to me. Anybody like say whats this all about, in simple terms for the layman like myself :smile:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2007
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 25, 2007 #2

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I can't find the study, and the New Scientist article requires a subscription. I'd like to read just exactly what it is they've come up with. Of course it's no secret that I :!!) David Deutsch.
     
  4. Sep 25, 2007 #3
    It can be demonstrated mathematically that your love for him is completely requited (but only in some obscure parallel universe).
     
  5. Sep 25, 2007 #4

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Of course, in another, Evo and Zooby are married and have seven children!
     
  6. Sep 25, 2007 #5

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Well, we refer to them as children, actually they are hippos we relocated to the zooby brush shelter.
     
  7. Sep 25, 2007 #6
    I can't speak for Evo, but I expect she requires a physical demonstration.
     
  8. Sep 25, 2007 #7
    :'( I thought I'd actually get intelligent comments from intelligent people; not to say you're unintelligent ofcourse!
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2007
  9. Sep 25, 2007 #8

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Last edited: Sep 25, 2007
  10. Sep 25, 2007 #9

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    May be every one should clap and wave their hands, how about street parties?
     
  11. Sep 25, 2007 #10

    EnumaElish

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Why is this thread under Gen. Disc., as opposed to, say, physics or math?
     
  12. Sep 25, 2007 #11

    SpaceTiger

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Ditto what Evo said, but I can say that the multiple universes idea is legit. I was under the impression, however, that there was no way to distinguish that from, say, the Copenhagen interpretation. If there is a way of distinguishing them, then obviously it's a really important result, but I'm skeptical.
     
  13. Sep 25, 2007 #12

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    We need to see a reference to a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal.
     
  14. Sep 25, 2007 #13

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There doesn't appear to be anythnig on the arXiv as yet, and I didn't find anything in Nature News, SciAm, Physicsworld or on Detcsh's website. If there really is something new here, I imagine vanesch would know.
     
  15. Sep 25, 2007 #14
    That's not the same universe Ivan is talking about. He's talking about the one where he and Math is Hard are our #4 and #5 kids. Fraternal twins, in fact. They grow up to run a family algae tea business. This is about 14 x10^56 branches away from the universe where our kids are hippos.
     
  16. Sep 25, 2007 #15

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I can't help but wonder if it's a bit of a publicity stunt, timed to coincide with the 50th anniversary of Everett's paper. An "Everett at 50" conference just concluded yesterday.
     
  17. Sep 25, 2007 #16

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    But isn't a parallel universe non-testable/non-falsifiable. One cannot get outside this one, so one is left with an abstract mathematical model that has no physical reality behind it - well it's real more or less if it is consistent with observable phenomenon in this universe?

    Is this all about all possible outcomes of some event?
     
  18. Sep 25, 2007 #17

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Yes, I'm a bit skeptical about a news story about an article about a study. No telling what the study actually concluded.
     
  19. Sep 25, 2007 #18

    Art

    User Avatar

    A problem with a multiverse containing all possible outcomes is one would expect to see multiple 'miracles' happening every day as our universe absorbed it's share of very unlikely outcomes. If all the really unlikely outcomes are reserved only for other universes then it would suggest some kind of intelligent controller overseeing things.
     
  20. Sep 25, 2007 #19

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The most difficult part is that the news story isn't even clear whose work it's talking about. It refers to Everett's work, Deutsch's work, some other folks, but talks about it all so vaguely that it could be nothing more than a recap of all the old stuff (and unless Deutsch has been asleep at the wheel since 2004, he desperately needs to update his website to include more current publications!) There's no reference to the source of the original article that spurred the story, and I don't know if it would be contained in the Sci Am article either.

    Even from what the vague article is saying, though, it doesn't really sound like anyone is saying there ARE parallel universes, more that it's a probability model that sets up all the different possible outcomes AS IF there were multiple universes, and until one observes what actually happens, and of those possible outcomes may be reality. But, this stuff is WAY beyond my expertise, so I could be misinterpreting that as badly as the news story about the magazine article about the scientific paper(s) may be misinterpreting it. :yuck:
     
  21. Sep 25, 2007 #20

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    The outcomes don't have to be miraculous, just different.

    For example last week I walked the dog and broke my arm, alternatives would be not breaking my arm, breaking my leg, spraining my arm, not falling, not walking the dog, not owning a dog, etc...
     
  22. Sep 25, 2007 #21

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    It seems the Breitbart article is reference the work of Deutsch et al at Oxford, and also cites a parallel (just couldn't resist) article in New Scientist, which includes a comment by Dr Andy Albrecht of UCD. All this supports the conjecture of Everett. But the 'mathematical discovery' is attributed to the Oxford group.

    I'm skeptical.
     
  23. Sep 25, 2007 #22

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    How do you take the leap from "can't be measured" to "doesn't exist". Sure, it doesn't exist in our universe, but by definition we are talking about a multiverse. I think yours is one interpretation, but not the only one.

    Vanesch could help here.
     
  24. Sep 25, 2007 #23

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Maybe I should have said that outside this universe is 'unrealizable' and as such, one can only 'speculate' as one would do about an 'afterlife', which anyone could start to argue is simply a parallel universe.

    Would those models also speculate that the same 'laws' exist, e.g. spin, mass, matter, e/m, quark charge, color, me/mp, . . . . are the same or different?
     
  25. Sep 25, 2007 #24

    Art

    User Avatar

    But some of the most unlikely outcomes (from our perspective) would appear miraculous. If all possible outcomes actually happen then it follows that highly unlikely results should be as common as expected results as the highly unusual should be mixed equally with the usual. For example there tends to be very few survivors from a plane crash. Surviving is a possibility so in the multiverse, assuming each universe is of equal merit, there must be a branch of reality where all the passengers survive and this possibility should have equal weight to none surviving yet we never see the result where all the passengers survive and so it seems (again based on our expectations) all of the highly unlikely outcomes end up in someone else's universe. So why not in ours?
     
  26. Sep 25, 2007 #25

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Perhaps it is only alternative outcomes that don't defy known laws. If a plane crashes, tears apart and burns, we know the human body can only survive so much. For all passengers on a destroyed plane to survive would not be natural. If I drop a rock on my toe in this universe, an alternative would not be for the rock to fly upwards, or turn into a feather.

    In an alternate universe, I wouldn't give birth to a chicken. I think it is alternate realistic scenarios.

    But what do I know?
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook