Mid-morning. You and Carol had breakfast and read the paper. Neither of
you slept well because of your persistent illnesses. If you are not better by
tomorrow morning the plan is to return to the doctor’s office; this was Carol’s
suggestion not yours. – Amorella
0852
hours. I think she is hurting more than I am; when she suggested this last
night I was more than reluctant but this morning, I think she is probably
right. I should have recovered by now but this lingers on and sometimes feels
like it did a few days ago. I had a piece of candy bar after breakfast and
actually makes me feel better or more like taking a nap. I’ll opt for the nap.
Mid-afternoon. You had a late lunch at
Chipotle/Panera then stopped by for dessert at Graeter’s. You sat in the car
facing north (toward the parking lot of Westchester/UC Hospital) watching the
police clean up a fender bender accident just across the street; a further stop
at the bank and home. – Amorella
1620
hours. The Pilgrims come to mind with the time and unleash a history on why we
are who we are as a 400 year old culture. A few minutes ago I was reading a BBC
article suggesting we ought to more actively seek galactic aliens and one of
the arguments is to send them the Internet to show as we are rather than set up
a more formal ‘cleaned up’ introduction like we are applying for a job
interview with the local branch of the normally reserved galactic empire. We
have come a long way in four hundred years, but then, not so much depending
your viewing angle.
Merlyn’s dream is but one plausibility boy.
What do you think would be the most surprising aspect of actually landing on
planet one to focus on an archeological dig? – Amorella
1635
hours. I think they might enjoy it more because it was not as they originally
planned, which was to be included on a ‘secret’ project with their equivalent
higher education system. At least that’s how I remember it presently.
Post. - Amorella
1730
hours. Note – ThreePlanets Earth-alien information is quantum streamed
‘Essential One’ Unrouted [EOU].
You are attempting to conjure up some sort
of hierarchy of classified communication. This is unnecessary. ‘Unrouted’ means
any information on this Merlyn dream does not exist unless the Director,
Drenakite (a 470 year old female, a nearly naked and hairless sacerdotal priestess.
From a human perspective Drenakite appears to be a healthy older woman who
weighs about 134 pounds. She wears a long silk-like wrap-around dark green
dress from waist to ankles, open-toed leather sandals and a white sailor’s cap
whose circular bill can be turned down. Her appearance and manner is similar to
a Buddhist monk. Drenakite is the lone refurbrisher of Onesixanzero; what Drenakite,
Cleric of ThreePlanets, knows is that Onesixanzero is a singular biochemical
and tri-quantum field thought-reason-emotional analysis speculator based on
advanced marsupial and human elements of consciousness and unconscious
behaviors), Ship and Onesixanzero
collectively say it does. – Post. – Amorella
1800
hours. This is coming together and is simpler to implement than on Earth.
2329
hours. This took a bit of work, but it allows me to read more carefully and
consider the points. However, I will have to reread this a time or two. This is
very interesting stuff. I love these considerations. Flowers they are. - rho
You had cereal and a small piece of left
over pizza for supper; Carol had warmed up veggie soup. You watched “The
Mentalist” and “Mysteries of Laura” as well as NBC News before Carol went
upstairs and you returned to your MacAir.
2203
hours. I saw this on Quora tonight. It is an interesting question and response.
** **
How
many dimensions are there in our universe?
Barak Shoshany, Graduate
Student at Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics 82 upvotes by Inna Vishik (Postdoctoral fellow @ MIT physics department), Nikita Butakov (Nanophotonics PhD student, UC Santa Barbara), Deep Sarkar (Ph.D. Research Scholar in Physics at TIFR), Kevin Peter
Hickerson (PhD), Abhijeet Borkar (PhD student in Physics (Astrophysics)), Scholar in Physics
at TIFR), Kevin Peter
Hickerson (PhD), Chase Quinton,
Aram Tadevosyan, Asher Syed, Olivier Garamfalvi, Henrik Oldcorn, Leopold III, Sandar Lim, Rogelio Lorenzo, Mithil Kamble, Listra Yehezkiel Ginting, Marc Serra, Akilesh Potti, Vijay Chaudhary, Chris Craddock, Glenn Yu.
*
Let
us begin by defining what is meant by "dimension" when one says
"our universe has dimensions". The number of dimensions in spacetime
is, roughly speaking, the number of coordinates required to specify a point in
spacetime.
According
to this definition, there are exactly 4 dimensions that we know of: one
of time and three of space. The time dimension needs no explanation; the value
of the time coordinate can be, for example, "1/1/2015, 10:00:00 AM
EST". The three space dimensions are, intuitively, length, width and
height.
Some
speculative theories predict, require or postulate additional dimensions, but
their exact number and properties vary from theory to theory, and there is no
proof that any of these theories are actually correct.
In
general, speculative extra dimensions in these speculative theories are
dimensions of space, although some theories postulate an extra time dimension.
There
are also different explanations as to why we cannot detect the speculative
extra dimensions. One explanation is that the extra dimensions are
"compact", i.e. they are too small for us to detect them. If they are
not compact then they are usually called "large" extra dimensions,
and it is postulated that we are restricted to a particular 4-dimensional
surface within the higher-dimensional universe (or multiverse).
Note
that science fiction writers often use the word "dimension" when they
actually mean to say "parallel universe". That usage is completely
incorrect, but is unfortunately nevertheless still popular.
Some more technical stuff:
Spacetime
is described mathematically using a mathematical structure called a manifold
(usually a pseudo-Riemannian
manifold). When physicists say that
spacetime has dimensions, they specifically mean that the manifold used to
describe spacetime is -dimensional. The dimension of a manifold has an exact
and rigorous definition.
Physics
makes use of a variety of other abstract mathematical structures, which have
their own definition of dimension. These structures may have any number of
dimensions between zero and infinity (including non-integer dimensions). It
should be stressed that, although the word "dimension" is used in the
context of these structures, it is not the same as the dimension of spacetime,
which is defined differently.
Selected and edited
from QuoraDOTcom (12 February 2015)
** **
Parallel universe is always your meaning,
which is in common with the use in science fiction. However, why does the word
‘parallel’ have to be used? Why can’t there be non-parallel universe? -
Amorella
2224
hours. I have been researching your question and find I was somewhat confused. However,
I found a source that clarifies this for me and I should note this to remind me
to think the question through. I usually resort to Wikipedia to settle my mind
into a thought; no exception here.
** **
The multiverse
(or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite
possible universes (including the Universe we consistently experience) that
together comprise everything that exists: the entirety of space, time, matter,
and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them. The
various universes within the multiverse are sometimes called parallel
universes or "alternate universes".
The
structure of the multiverse, the nature of each universe within it and the
relationships among the various constituent universes, depend on the specific
multiverse hypothesis considered. Multiple universes have been hypothesized in
cosmology, physics, astronomy, religion, philosophy, transpersonal psychology
and fiction, particularly in science fiction and fantasy. In these contexts,
parallel universes are also called "alternate universes",
"quantum universes", "interpenetrating dimensions",
"parallel dimensions", "parallel worlds", "alternate
realities", "alternate timelines", and "dimensional
planes," among others. The term 'multiverse' was coined in 1895 by the
American philosopher and psychologist William James in a different context.
The multiverse hypothesis is a
source of debate within the physics community. Physicists disagree about
whether the multiverse exists, and whether the multiverse is a proper subject
of scientific inquiry. Supporters of one of the multiverse hypotheses include
Stephen Hawking, Steven Weinberg, Brian Greene, Max Tegmark, Alan Guth, Andreia
Linde, Michio Kaku, David Deutsch, Leonard Sussking, Raj Pathria, Sean Carroll,
Alex Vilenkin, Laura Mersini-Houghton, and Neil deGrasse Tyson.
In contrast, critics such as Jim
Baggott, David Gross, Paul Steinhardt, George Ellis and Paul Davies have argued that the
multiverse question is philosophical rather than scientific, that the
multiverse cannot be a scientific question because it lacks falsifiability, or
even that the multiverse hypothesis is harmful or pseudoscientific.
Multiverse hypotheses in physics
Categories
Max Tegmark and Brian Greene have
devised classification schemes that categorize the various theoretical types of
multiverse, or types of universe that might theoretically comprise a multiverse
ensemble.
Max
Tegmark's four levels
Cosmologist Max Tegmark has
provided a taxonomy of universes beyond the familiar observable universe. The
levels according to Tegmark's classification are arranged such that subsequent
levels can be understood to encompass and expand upon previous levels, and they
are briefly described below.
Level I:
Beyond our cosmological horizon
A
generic prediction of chaotic inflation is an infinite ergodic universe, which,
being infinite, must contain Hubble volumes realizing all initial conditions.
Accordingly,
an infinite universe will contain an infinite number of Hubble volumes, all having
the same physical laws and physical constants. In regard to configurations such
as the distribution of matter, almost all will differ from our Hubble volume.
However, because there are infinitely many, far beyond the cosmological horizon,
there will eventually be Hubble volumes with similar, and even identical,
configurations. Tegmark estimates that an identical volume to ours should be
about 1010115
meters away from us. Given infinite space, there
would, in fact, be an infinite number of Hubble volumes identical to ours in
the Universe. This follows directly from the cosmological principle, wherein it
is assumed our Hubble volume is not special or unique.
Level
II: Universes with different physical constants
"Bubble universes":
every disk is a bubble universe (Universe 1 to Universe 6 are different
bubbles; they have physical constants that are different from our universe);
our universe is just one of the bubbles.
In the
chaotic inflation theory, a variant of the cosmic inflation theory, the
multiverse as a whole is stretching and will continue doing so forever, but
some regions of space stop stretching and form distinct bubbles, like gas
pockets in a loaf of rising bread. Such bubbles are embryonic level I
multiverses. Linde and Vanchurin calculated the number of these universes to be
on the scale of 101010,000,000.
Different
bubbles may experience different spontaneous symmetry breaking resulting in
different properties such as different physical constants. This level also
includes John Archibald Wheeler’s oscillatory universe theory and Lee Smolin’s
fecund universes theory.
Level
III: Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics
Hugh Everett’s many-worlds interpretation (MWI) is one of several mainstream interpretations of quantum
mechanics. In brief, one aspect of quantum mechanics is that certain
observations cannot be predicted absolutely. Instead, there is a range of
possible observations, each with a different probability. According to the MWI,
each of these possible observations corresponds to a different universe.
Suppose a die is thrown that contains six sides and that the numeric result of
the throw corresponds to a quantum mechanics observable. All six possible ways
the die can fall correspond to six different universes.
Tegmark
argues that a level III multiverse does not contain more possibilities in the
Hubble volume than a level I-II multiverse.
In
effect, all the different "worlds" created by "splits" in a
level III multiverse with the same physical constants can be found in some
Hubble volume in a level I multiverse.
Tegmark
writes that "The only difference between Level I and Level III is where
your dopplelgängers reside. In Level I they live elsewhere in good old
three-dimensional space. In Level III they live on another quantum branch in
infinite-dimensional Hilbert space." Similarly, all level II bubble
universes with different physical constants can in effect be found as
"worlds" created by "splits" at the moment of spontaneous
symmetry breaking in a level III multiverse.
Related
to the many-worlds idea are Richard Feynman’s multiple histories interpretation and H. Dieter Zeh’s many-minds interpretation.
Level
IV: Ultimate ensemble
The
ultimate ensemble or mathematical universe hypothesis is the hypothesis of
Tegmark himself. This level considers equally real all universes that can be
described by different mathematical structures. Tegmark writes that “abstract
mathematics is so general that any Theory of Everything that is definable in
purely formal terms (independent of vague human terminology) is also a
mathematical structure. For instance, a TOE involving a set of different types
of entities (denoted by words, say) and relations between them (denoted by
additional words) is nothing but what mathematicians call a set-theoretical
model, and one can generally find a formal system that it is a model of."
He argues this "implies that any conceivable parallel universe theory can
be described at Level IV" and "subsumes all other ensembles,
therefore brings closure to the hierarchy of multiverses, and there cannot be
say a Level V."
Jurgen
Schmidhuber, however, says the "set of mathematical structures" is
not even well-defined, and admits only universe representations describable by
constructive mathematics, that is, computer programs. He explicitly includes
universe representations describable by non-halting programs whose output bits
converge after finite time, although the convergence time itself may not be
predictable by a halting program, due to Kurt Godel’s limitations. He also
explicitly discusses the more restricted ensemble of quickly computable
universes.
Brian
Greene's nine types
American
theoretical physicist and string theorist Brian Greene discussed nine types of
parallel universes:
Quilted
The
quilted multiverse works only in an infinite universe. With an infinite amount
of space, every possible event will occur an infinite number of times. However,
the speed of light prevents us from being aware of these other identical areas.
Inflationary
The
inflationary multiverse is composed of various pockets where inflation fields
collapse and form new universes.
Brane
The
brane multiverse follows from M-theory and states that each universe is a
3-dimensional brane that exists with many others. Particles are bound to their
respective branes except for gravity.
Cyclic
The
cyclic multiverse has multiple branes (each a universe) that collided, causing
Big Bangs. The universes bounce back and pass through time, until they are
pulled back together and again collide, destroying the old contents and
creating them anew.
Landscape
The landscape multiverse relies on string
theory's Calabi-Yau shapes. Quantum fluctuations drop the shapes to a lower
energy level, creating a pocket with a different set of laws from the
surrounding space.
Quantum
The
quantum multiverse creates a new universe when a diversion in events occurs, as
in the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Holographic
The
holographic multiverse is derived from the theory
that the surface area of a space can simulate the volume of the region.
Simulated
The
simulated multiverse exists on complex computer systems that simulate entire
universes.
Ultimate
The
ultimate multiverse contains every mathematically possible universe under
different laws of physics.
Cyclic
theories
In
several theories there is a series of infinite, self-sustaining cycles (for
example: an eternity of Big Bang crunches).
M-theory
A
multiverse of a somewhat different kind has been envisaged within string theory
and its higher-dimensional extension, M-theory. These theories require the
presence of 10 or 11 spacetime dimensions respectively. The extra 6 or 7
dimensions may either be compactified on a very small scale, or our universe
may simply be localized on a dynamical (3+1)-dimensional object, a D-brane.
This opens up the possibility that there are other branes which could support
"other universes". This is unlike the Universes in the “quantum multiverse”, but
both concepts can operate at the same time.
Some
scenarios postulate that our big bang was created, along with our universe, by
the collision of two branes.
Black-hole
cosmology
A
black-hole cosmology is a cosmological model in which the observable universe
is the interior of a black hole existing as one of possibly many inside a
larger universe. This includes the theory of white holes of which are on the
opposite side of space time. While a black hole sucks everything in including
light, a white hole releases matter and light, hence the name "white
hole".
Anthropic
principle
The
concept of other universes has been proposed to explain how our own universe appears
to be fine-tuned for conscious life as we experience it. If there were a large
(possibly infinite) number of universes, each with possibly different physical
laws (or different fundamental physical constants), some of these universes,
even if very few, would have the combination of laws and fundamental parameters
that are suitable for the development of matter, astronomical structures,
elemental diversity, stars, and planets that can exist long enough for life to
emerge and evolve. The weak anthropic principle could then be applied to
conclude that we (as conscious beings) would only exist in one of those few
universes that happened to be finely tuned, permitting the existence of life
with developed consciousness. Thus, while the probability might be extremely
small that any particular universe would have the requisite conditions for life
(as we understand life) to emerge and evolve, this does not require intelligent
design as an explanation for the conditions in the Universe that promote our
existence in it.
Search
for evidence
Around
2010, scientists such as Stephen M. Feeney analyzed Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) data and claimed to find preliminary evidence
suggesting that our universe collided with other (parallel) universes in the
distant past. However, a more thorough analysis of data from the WMAP and from
the Planck satellite, which has a resolution 3 times higher than WMAP, failed
to find any statistically significant evidence of such a bubble universe
collision. In addition, there is no evidence of any gravitational pull of
other universes on ours.
Examples of criticisms
*
For a
start, how is the existence of the other universes to be tested? To be sure,
all cosmologists accept that there are some regions of the universe that lie
beyond the reach of our telescopes, but somewhere on the slippery slope between
that and the idea that there are an infinite number of universes, credibility
reaches a limit. As one slips down that slope, more and more must be accepted
on faith, and less and less is open to scientific verification. Extreme
multiverse explanations are therefore reminiscent of theological discussions.
Indeed, invoking an infinity of unseen universes to explain the unusual
features of the one we do see is just as ad hoc as invoking an unseen Creator.
The multiverse theory may be dressed up in scientific language, but in essence
it requires the same leap of faith.
— Paul Davies, A Brief History
of the Multiverse
*
As
skeptical as I am, I think the contemplation of the multiverse is an excellent
opportunity to reflect on the nature of science and on the ultimate nature of
existence: why we are here… In looking at this concept, we need an open mind,
though not too open. It is a delicate path to tread. Parallel universes may or
may not exist; the case is unproved. We are going to have to live with that
uncertainty. Nothing is wrong with scientifically based philosophical speculation,
which is what multiverse proposals are. But we should name it for what it is.
— George Ellis, Scientific
American, Does the Multiverse Really Exist?
*
[A]n
entire ensemble is often much simpler than one of its members. This principle
can be stated more formally using the notion of algorithmic information content.
The algorithmic information content in a number is, roughly speaking, the
length of the shortest computer program that will produce that number as
output. For example, consider the set of all integers. Which is simpler, the
whole set or just one number? Naively, you might think that a single number is
simpler, but the entire set can be generated by quite a trivial computer
program, whereas a single number can be hugely long. Therefore, the whole set
is actually simpler...
(Similarly),
the higher-level multiverses are simpler. Going from our universe to the Level
I multiverse eliminates the need to specify initial conditions, upgrading to
Level II eliminates the need to specify physical constants, and the Level IV
multiverse eliminates the need to specify anything at all.... A common feature
of all four multiverse levels is that the simplest and arguably most elegant
theory involves parallel universes by default. To deny the existence of those
universes, one needs to complicate the theory by adding experimentally
unsupported processes and ad hoc postulates: finite space, wave function collapse
and ontological asymmetry. Our judgment therefore comes down to which we find
more wasteful and inelegant: many worlds or many words. Perhaps we will
gradually get used to the weird ways of our cosmos and find its strangeness to
be part of its charm.
— Max Tegmark, "Parallel
universes. Not just a staple of science fiction, other universes are a direct
implication of cosmological observations." Scientific American 2003
May;288(5):40–51
*
A
pervasive idea in fundamental physics and cosmology that should be retired: the
notion that we live in a multiverse in which the laws of physics and the
properties of the cosmos vary randomly from one patch of space to another.
According to this view, the laws and properties within our observable universe
cannot be explained or predicted because they are set by chance. Different
regions of space too distant to ever be observed have different laws and
properties, according to this picture. Over the entire multiverse, there are
infinitely many distinct patches. Among these patches, in the words of Alan
Guth, "anything that can happen will happen—and it will happen infinitely
many times". Hence, I refer to this concept as a Theory of Anything. Any
observation or combination of observations is consistent with a Theory of
Anything. No observation or combination of observations can disprove it.
Proponents seem to revel in the fact that the Theory cannot be falsified. The
rest of the scientific community should be up in arms since an unfalsifiable
idea lies beyond the bounds of normal science. Yet, except for a few voices,
there has been surprising complacency and, in some cases, grudging acceptance
of a Theory of Anything as a logical possibility. The scientific journals are
full of papers treating the Theory of Anything seriously. What is going on?
— Paul Steinhardt, "Theories
of Anything" edge.com'
*
A Theory
of Anything is useless because it does not rule out any possibility and
worthless because it submits to no do-or-die tests. (Many papers discuss
potential observable consequences, but these are only possibilities, not
certainties, so the Theory is never really put at risk.)
— Paul Steinhardt, "Theories
of Anything" edge.com'
*
Multiverse hypotheses in philosophy and logic
Modal
realism
Possible worlds are a way of
explaining probability, hypothetical statements and the like, and some
philosophers such as David Lewis believe that all possible worlds exist, and
are just as real as the actual world (a position known as modal realism).
Trans-world
identity
A
metaphysical issue that crops up in multiverse schema that posit infinite
identical copies of any given universe is that of the notion that there can be
identical objects in different possible worlds. According to the counterpart
theory of David Lewis, the objects should be regarded as similar rather than
identical.
Fictional
realism
The view that because fictions
exist, fictional characters exist as well. There are fictional entities, in the
same sense in which, setting aside philosophical disputes, there are people,
Mondays, numbers and planets.
*
Selected and edited from
Wikipedia – Multiverse
** **
You
have a lot of material to consider here; but consider it you must because the
marsupial-humanoids and the humans will have a discussion on what this means in
terms of the use of quantum informational systems within ThreePlanets
machinery. – Amorella
2239 hours. I understand this will be a small part but
it will contain the principles of how things work in terms of this
archeological dig setting.
When you’ve cleaned this up, post. –
Amorella
No comments:
Post a Comment