Page 2 of 4 [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Yowuza
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jan 2011
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Posts: 178

20 Feb 2011, 7:24 am

I've been thinking...

to us, the universe is everything in existence. Why am I telling you this? Because going by that, alternate universes don't exist to us, and we don't exist to people in parallel universes. So, in theory, there could be an infinite amount of universes with completely different laws of physics that don't exist to each other.

Anyways, ignore my ramblings and carry on.



PatrickNeville
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Sep 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,136
Location: Scotland

20 Feb 2011, 9:37 am

Lots of things we are yet to be able to explain:

13 things which make no sense, with our current understanding of things.

http://www.newscientist.com/special/13-more-things


_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here> ;)


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

20 Feb 2011, 12:11 pm

Biokinetica wrote:
You need to stop doing that. There is evidence for it, it just happens to support other ideas as well.


Evidence that supports two contrary positions is not evidence for either.

If p -> q and p->-q then p is false. Otherwise q & -q would be true which is a contradiction.

ruveyn



Last edited by ruveyn on 20 Feb 2011, 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Biokinetica
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 8 Dec 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 266
Location: Vulcan

20 Feb 2011, 1:17 pm

What positions are contrary? The MWI and CI for example aren't really contrary, one is just an expansion of the other. However, they're distinct interpretations.



supra_chiasma
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 35
Location: A planet close to the sun. (The netherlands)

03 Mar 2011, 12:25 pm

Yowuza wrote:
I've been thinking...

to us, the universe is everything in existence. Why am I telling you this? Because going by that, alternate universes don't exist to us, and we don't exist to people in parallel universes. So, in theory, there could be an infinite amount of universes with completely different laws of physics that don't exist to each other.

Anyways, ignore my ramblings and carry on.



Beautiful


_________________
Renée


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 Mar 2011, 2:14 pm

Biokinetica wrote:
You need to stop doing that. There is evidence for it, it just happens to support other ideas as well.


if p -> q and p-> -q then -p

Only a false proposition can imply another proposition and its negation.

ruveyn



PatrickNeville
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Sep 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,136
Location: Scotland

03 Mar 2011, 2:16 pm

supra_chiasma wrote:
Yowuza wrote:
I've been thinking...

to us, the universe is everything in existence. Why am I telling you this? Because going by that, alternate universes don't exist to us, and we don't exist to people in parallel universes. So, in theory, there could be an infinite amount of universes with completely different laws of physics that don't exist to each other.

Anyways, ignore my ramblings and carry on.



Beautiful


One day we also may learn how to transport material / energy into a different universe or dimension.

It would be reasonable to assume that we would first of all need to figure out where another universe exists, attempt to create some theoretical framework as to how we may interact with it then if we can come up with at least 1, and hopefully many more plausible theories we could program a probe equipped with sophisticated AI and set it the task of transporting itself to another universe for a minute amount of time, recording data (we'd be able to record stuff quickly by this point in time id imagine) then transport itself back.

There would be no way of knowing if the probe would travel there in the first place, if it would come back or if how long it may really take to come back depending on things such as time, or distances and energies we can't even comprehend fully.

I should also point out any AI probe would need to be of the most robust design possible so that it can make it back in one piece. We'd hopefully have a good idea of laws of nature in another universe before travelling there and back but it is likely going to be hard to predict.


_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here> ;)


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 Mar 2011, 2:18 pm

PatrickNeville wrote:

One day we also may learn how to transport material / energy into a different universe or dimension.

.


Given the conservation laws how do you propose to do that?

ruveyn



PatrickNeville
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Sep 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,136
Location: Scotland

03 Mar 2011, 2:29 pm

ruveyn wrote:
PatrickNeville wrote:

One day we also may learn how to transport material / energy into a different universe or dimension.

.


Given the conservation laws how do you propose to do that?

ruveyn


Well there is no such thing as an absolute truth, which is why i said may learn to over come seemingly "natural" laws.

There is absolutely no way of telling with our current instrumentation that there will not be a way of over coming the law of conversation.

There is also absolutely no way of telling if the law of conversation would even have to be broken in the end.

We still have a lot to learn about how the universe operates and I am not for one second proposing there is a definite way of of doing everything but would like to state that anyone who says certain things regarding science are absolutely impossible, are probably narrow minded.


_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here> ;)


pakled
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,015

03 Mar 2011, 11:37 pm

well, I can't disprove it...;) Unless I did in another universe...;)


_________________
anahl nathrak, uth vas bethude, doth yel dyenvey...


Biokinetica
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 8 Dec 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 266
Location: Vulcan

04 Mar 2011, 6:08 am

ruveyn wrote:
Biokinetica wrote:
You need to stop doing that. There is evidence for it, it just happens to support other ideas as well.


if p -> q and p-> -q then -p

Only a false proposition can imply another proposition and its negation.

ruveyn

You can't say P yields -Q. That implies you are able to prove a negative. You can only prove what is, not what isn't. This is where propositional logic fails.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Mar 2011, 6:56 am

Biokinetica wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Biokinetica wrote:
You need to stop doing that. There is evidence for it, it just happens to support other ideas as well.


if p -> q and p-> -q then -p

Only a false proposition can imply another proposition and its negation.

ruveyn

You can't say P yields -Q. That implies you are able to prove a negative. You can only prove what is, not what isn't. This is where propositional logic fails.


Oh yeah? p -> -(q&-q).

ruveyn



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

04 Mar 2011, 9:55 am

i think they might be possible, our understanding of the universe are very vague at the moment, yes i know we have a lot of "natural laws" but in reality most of them are aproximations, untill someone finds a TOE its all speculation.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


Biokinetica
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 8 Dec 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 266
Location: Vulcan

04 Mar 2011, 12:56 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Biokinetica wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Biokinetica wrote:
You need to stop doing that. There is evidence for it, it just happens to support other ideas as well.


if p -> q and p-> -q then -p

Only a false proposition can imply another proposition and its negation.

ruveyn

You can't say P yields -Q. That implies you are able to prove a negative. You can only prove what is, not what isn't. This is where propositional logic fails.


Oh yeah? p -> -(q&-q).

ruveyn

You totally missed the point. Greek logic is binary. The universe is not. On top of that, you're ignoring the difference between a valid argument and a sound one.



Helixstein
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,744
Location: New Zealand

04 Mar 2011, 1:37 pm

The fourth dimension is time. (Quote)

That is unconfirmed, and really the idea is not very comforting for most scientists. I do not believe in a 'parallel universe' at all; due to the abundance of space expanding, I fail to believe that there is another paradoxical universe replicating the value of our Omega.


_________________
"We accept the love we think we deserve."


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Mar 2011, 3:53 pm

Biokinetica wrote:
You totally missed the point. Greek logic is binary. The universe is not. On top of that, you're ignoring the difference between a valid argument and a sound one.


No I am not. The universally quantified axioms of physical science are not empirically verifiable so any argument based on them cannot be sound. We simply do not know if these assumptions are true.

ruveyn