Jump to content
Maniac Muslim Forums
Spider

The Multiverse Hypothesis

Recommended Posts

Some of you may be already acquainted with a concept known as the fine-tuned universe. Basically, it asserts that the laws of physics are perfectly fine-tuned for the emergence of life. Physicists have discovered that the physical constants and their values are so delicately balanced that if they were to be altered by even a hair’s breadth, then life could not exist. This idea has perplexed many scientists over the years. And this is something that is being verified over and over again. Professor Ulf-G Meißner, for example, in explaining his new study, states: "The Universe we live in is characterized by certain parameters that take specific values that appear to be remarkably fine-tuned to make life, including on Earth, possible."

The philosophical implication of a fine-tuned universe is generally that the emergency of life and the stunning complexity behind it couldn't have occurred merely by accidental, mindless natural events. That's why many theists use this as a rational argument for God's existence, and I don't think that it's really a bad one. Scientists, of course, are still skeptical about this particular argument. Nonetheless, they are still quite fascinated by the fine-tuning itself because of the extremely low probability of such a finely-tuned universe.

The most remarkable of all is the value of the cosmological constant. Regarding this constant, the physicist Leonard Susskind, in a documentary titled "What We Still Don't Know," said that this cosmological constant is "tuned to 1 part and 10 to the 120 - [he repeats] a hundred and twenty decimal places. Nobody thinks that's accidental. That is not a reasonable idea ... that something is tuned to 120 decimal places just by accident. That's the most extreme example of fine tuning."

David Malone, the narrator in the documentary, states: "The cosmological constant needs to be set to 1 part in a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion. Otherwise, the universe would be so drastically different that it would be impossible for us to evolve. That the cosmological constant arrived at such a tiny value by chance seemed to be out of the question."

 

Puzzled by the fine-tuned universe, many scientists began to adopt the multiverse hypothesis, which asserts that there may be countless - and perhaps an infinite - number of universes that each contain different physical constants and different laws of nature from each other. The scientists, therefore, maintain that sooner or later a universe like ours was simply bound to happen. it was just a matter of time. it was just a matter of probability. And so they think that our fine-tuned universe is not a miraculous thing anymore.

In another forum, this is what an atheist told me once:

 

I have a lot of time for the multiverse theory that there are infinite universes being infinitely created outside of our own. Eventually, by sheer scale of numerical odds, our finely tuned universe would have to be brought into existence.

 

The following are the points that replied with, which I'd like to share with you guys.

1. Although the argument for a multiverse is suggested by certain mathematical models currently being deployed in theoretical physics, we do not know if the idea is really true. It is actually far from being anything conclusive and there are many different opinions on this. Therefore, if you believe in the multiverse hypothesis, then you have simply taken a leap of faith just like believing in intelligent design is a leap of faith, to some degree.

2. According to the infinite multiverse logic, it seems that the supporters of the multiverse are conveniently able to overcome the problem of fine-tuning by shifting their attention to enormously large numbers and even the ungraspable "infinite." They believe that given an infinite amount of time, infinite space, infinite universes, infinite whatever, we were simply destined to happen. It was only a matter of time before we came into existence. And not only that, but one might even argue that perhaps anything is possible when we bring in the notion of "infinity." So, you're just gonna have to take a leap into the absurd and agree that anything is possible ... "With infinity all things are possible." (Oh hey, that sounds eerily familiar).

But now the problem with that is, you wouldn't be able to justify why one kind of universe is more likely to exist than another kind of universe (given the infinite amount of possibilities). For example, you wouldn't be able to justify why it is more likely that the universe we are living in is the kind where human beings will remain dead forever, as opposed to being a universe which is fashioned in a way as to undergo a change of natural laws in the future and then cause the dead to be resurrected again.

3. Speaking of infinite universes, what is truly "infinite"?

My answer to that is that infinity is an idea; an idea of something that is endless. Infinity is an abstraction. Infinity is not a quantity and thus it cannot be measured. We just believe in it even though everything that see, experience, and know about in this world are finite, not infinite. And nothing finite can ever reach infinity. So nothing that we know of can be truly "infinite." Therefore, the idea that there are "infinite universes" doesn't really make sense in the first place, i.e. because universes are finite and finite things can never add up to infinity.

But then where does the idea of infinity come from? Well, as I just said above, nothing is truly infinite. Only the infinite can be infinite, which means that it is so unique that there is nothing else like it nor even anything comparable to it. And the infinite requires no other explanation; it suffices for itself as an explanation. In that vein, I believe that the idea of infinity can come only from God because only God is the actually infinite, nothing else. The concept of God and the concept of infinity are inseparable in nearly all of the world's religions. The concept of infinity has been used as an ontological argument for God’s existence by philosophers, too, one of them being René Descartes.

René Descartes believed God was actually infinite, and he remarked that the concept of actual infinity is so awesome that no human could have created it or deduced it from other concepts, so any idea of infinity that humans have must have come from God directly. Thus God exists. Descartes is using the concept of infinity to produce a new ontological argument for God’s existence.

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

4. In order for there to be a multiverse capable of generating life-permitting universes (which may be a large number but not infinite), then this multiverse itself has to be fine tuned in such a way as to let that happen, so then positing a multiverse does not actually undercut the mystery of fine tuning. It just pushes the fine tuning up one level.

5. In order for there to be a multiverse capable of generating rule-permitting universes (by "rules" I mean laws), then this entire multiverse itself has to be pre-determined by an optimally efficient "rule" that enables the creation of all the logically possible rule-permitting universes (irrespective of whether they contain life or not).

6. Putting together the last two points (4 and 5), and then applying Occam's razor, we must then concede that there has to be an optimally fast and simple algorithm (or a "program") that generates not only this universe, but also all the other logically possible universes which we have no knowledge of. And such an optimal way of generating universes of indefinite varieties itself needs to be fine tuned so as to allow the emergence of universes where there is a perfect harmony between the laws of physics and the conditions for life (whatever the conditions may be in those particular universes), which brings us full circle again ...

So guess what? We started with the idea of a fine-tuned universe and eventually ended up with a fine-tuned multiverse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. you are on your way to become the next Harun Yahya.

 

Be more specific and explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take your time, Haku. Take your time ...

 

no thanks. you take your time to learn cosmology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

salaam,

 

I just wanted to point this part out:

 

But then where does the idea of infinity come from? Well, as I just said above, nothing is truly infinite. Only the infinite can be infinite, which means that it is so unique that there is nothing else like it nor even anything comparable to it. And the infinite requires no other explanation; it suffices for itself as an explanation. In that vein, I believe that the idea of infinity can come only from God because only God is the actually infinite, nothing else.

 

Alot of theists for some reason like to make a big thing about infinity and relate it to God for some reason.

 

In Physics, at least to the level I am at, infinity is nothing but a limit. Say I want to divide 1 by a series of numbers.

 

1/2 = 0.5

1/3 = 0.33

1/4 = 0.25

and so on.

 

Now as the denominator gets larger, my answer on the right gets smaller. Now I can safely say to a great approximation that 1/200,000 = 0. I can go further on to say that 1/400,000 = 0. This is because the denominator is much much larger than the numerator!

 

But the most important thing to note is that, for all intents and purposes, to an excellent approximation is that:

 

1/200,000 = 1/400,000 = 1/100000000000000 = 0! (well to 5 decimal places anyway)

 

So even if we divided 1 by the largest number possible, infinity, we would get zero. Therefore we can approximate 1/200,000 as 1/infinity.

 

Being able to say this is useful for a vast number of reasons which I won't really go into. The main thing I want to point out though is that if you talk about infinity, you are saying that "we have such a huge number that it might as well be infinity," - or at least in my experience. I do find it puzzling that people try and relate this concept to God to try and debunk scientific theories, because it seems to be missing the point a bit

 

[Note]

I dont know anything about the multi verse theory and was hoping haku would explain it. It's like we occupy one state of the universe out of the many that could have existed(?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Thanks, that was an interesting explanation of infinity.

 

It seems that physicists refer to infinity in an approximate and a relative manner, and that's why it's not like the "pure" and "limitless" type of infinity which most people think of when they hear the word infinity. The philosopher Rene Descartes himself was a mathematician, but he probably held the "limitless" view of infinity, and that's why he used to believe that only God was actually infinite.

 

I don't think that he thought of infinity as a number per se, so he's not wrong. But I guess there are different ways of interpreting the concept of infinity.

 

no thanks. you take your time to learn cosmology.

 

Well, your comments here carry quite a weighty insinuation about my intellect, so you should back them up and not simply assert them, at least by pointing out one mistake in my post.

 

You haven't done that yet, so although your insinuations may provoke laughter, they are unjustified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, first of all, I am not interested in a debate or a discussion. you are trying to make an argument based on cosmology without ever taking a cosmology course (that is apparent). yet some how you hope you are going to be right. How different is your approach to a person who tries to refute Islam without ever taking time to study Islam? Similar to such a person, you are merely copy pasting a snippet from here and there, and expect to be right.

 

 

Perhaps most problematic thing you say is in #4. Contrary to what you say, multiverse doesn't need to be fine tuned. that was the whole point of multiverse to start with. #6 then crumbles and your conclusion of the post becomes unfounded.

 

I reserve right to troll this thread at will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps most problematic thing you say is in #4. Contrary to what you say, multiverse doesn't need to be fine tuned. that was the whole point of multiverse to start with. #6 then crumbles and your conclusion of the post becomes unfounded.

 

The point of # 4 is that a multiverse needs to be fine-tuned for the emergence of life-enabling universes, at least one of them, like ours.

 

The point of # 5 is that a multiverse needs to have a "rule" which is fine-tuned enough so that it's ultimate result will be a sufficiently greater variation of rules such as to create all the possible universes, including ours.

 

And # 6 is an incorporation of the last two points, which is that a multiverse itself has to be fine-tuned in order for fine-tuned universes to originate in the first place.

 

 

In conclusion, whether the multiverse idea is true or not, fine-tuning still exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In conclusion, whether the multiverse idea is true or not, fine-tuning still exists.

 

Well from what I understand from this thread, the whole point of the multi verse theory is that fine tuning does not exist. This is an analogy I came up with, however I have no idea if im on the wrong track lol.

 

Imagine starting from the big bang, where the universe started, in a freeze frame. You have some number X, which you can set to what you want, and press play. Depending on what X is, the expansion of the universe speeds up, slows down, expands uniformly or doesn't..

 

Fine tuning is the situation where someone specifically set X to a certain value for certain things to happen, ie setting X = 5 so earth exists... People in this particular universe would be amazed that X is 5, and wonder why that is so.

 

However what if I make 100 universes, where X = 1 in the first universe and X = 100 in the 100th universe. Suddenly there is no fine tuning, every possibility just exists and we happen to occupy only one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The point of # 4 is that a multiverse needs to be fine-tuned for the emergence of life-enabling universes, at least one of them, like ours.

 

no it doesn't. if you say it does, then you don't understand what multiverse means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However what if I make 100 universes, where X = 1 in the first universe and X = 100 in the 100th universe. Suddenly there is no fine tuning, every possibility just exists and we happen to occupy only one of them.

 

I think that is still fine tuned, because you specifically made 100 universes so that x=5 is included as one of the outcomes. You didn't choose to make 100 universes randomly. Rather, you had a goal in mind, so your choice to make 100 universes itself was a setup. You, as a multiverse generator, had to calculate the probability of x=5 being a winning value before making the decision to make that many universes.

 

Now, when we talk about a real multiverse generator, and the fundamental rules or laws behind it, we are dealing with something unfathomably more complex and powerful. If such a generator exists, then it itself has to be fine-tuned so that universes are stable enough to produce and operate according to their own fine-tuned set of laws. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any fine-tuning anywhere.

 

no it doesn't. if you say it does, then you don't understand what multiverse means.

 

Well, the fact that there is already a life-enabling universe (which we live in) entails that the fundamental laws underlying the multiverse (assuming it's true) has to be just right - i.e. fine-tuned - in order to allow life-enabling universes such as ours. Otherwise, there would only exist dead, life-prohibiting universes.

 

If the multiverse wasn't fine-tuned for life-enabling universes, then, logically, this universe couldn't have existed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×