I dislike the connotations of the term designer, but Collins is essentially correct. Multiverse theory is predicated solely on getting round the problem of fine tuning, and as such is unnecessarily inflationary. There is no evidence for multiverses scientifically, they simply short cut a philosophical problem.
Neither does multiverse theory. There is no reason to conclude that because one planet appears to have a delicately balanced system in a universe of immutable laws, that there must be a proliferation of other universes to allow it to occur. We only have a single perspective, we can't extrapolate from it. If there are other universes why can't they resemble the theist's heaven and hell? Because multiverse theory is based on the elimination of a deity as a principal aim. Let's not be coy about the motivation. If you disagree with deities on philosophical grounds, multiverse are no answer to them. Indeed, they function of the same irrefutable basis.
String theory, M-theory, multi universes, the Copenhagen interpretation, QM are all readily available to read via Google. I'm not adding or detracting from them in any way as conceptual models. What I'm suggesting is multiverse theory is not a model testable by science, there is no evidence for it, it gets cosmology out of a hole which was previously taken by the ontological primitive known as God (allowing for the variations in taxonomy). To offer multi-universes as somehow more "scientific" than a creative mind-at-large is misplaced, and mostly ideologically motivated. Physicalism is necessarily prejudiced against mind as an active agent, and is forced upon inflationary hypotheses to avoid it.
Jorgesthegreatness, yes, that's my point. There is no reason to assume that if the parameters were slightly different there would be no universe or no life. It's like growing up in a rain forest and thinking that if conditions were slightly different there could be no life. It's true that if the conditions were slightly different there would be no rainforest, but so what. There would be savannah, or shrub land, or boreal forest, or any number of other bio-zones. It's not that the parameters of the universe are fine tuned to ensure the evolution of our universe, but that our universe evolved as it did because the parameters are as they are. Change the parameters and we get a different universe, just as if we change the temperature, humidity, soil ph, etc, you get a different bio-zone.
I'm not sure what you are "very strongly disagreeing" with? I'm following the letter of multi-universe theory. Can you show evidence for a single one of the billions of other universes consistent with MUT? There are plenty of non-dualistic theories of mind, Idealism for instance. Not to mention the data offered by Radin's experiments on the observer effect, which are consistent with the century old predictions of quantum physics.
If God is omnipotent, all tasks are equally easy. If any task requires effort, then God is not omnipotent. Therefore, all tasks for God are infinitely easy. If creating a universe required an "act of will" it would not be infinitely easy. Whether multiverse "exist" in any human sense is irrelevant to God, because if there was any practical difference then God would not be omnipotent.
I have so many issues with the multiverse theory, but I do think it would be a good possible explanation for fine-tuning. Hatch enough Pikachu eggs in a Pokemon game and it's a statistical certainty you will eventually get ones with perfect stats. Predict a certain order of a deck of cards, and it may take longer than the universe exists to shuffle the deck and the result be that exact order. But given enough time, it would happen. Also there's the monkeys typing on typewriters thing. I don't think it would be possible in billions or trillions of years, but maybe infinity...
Probability is important to keep from deviation: Probability of getting 1 on a die is 1/6 and that of having the cosmological constant of our universe is 1/1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. This leads us to why believe in God and not crazy assumptions. Learn probability.
Let's assume that the multi-verse/bubble-verse theory is correct. Would all spring from one inflation, whether ours or any other down the line? If so then wouldn't the underlying fabric of Space Time be the same in all? If that is correct and we allow for either String Theory or QLT to also be correct, then perhaps there would be no dramatic difference in the "fine tuning" between Universes. Strings/Loops could be confined to only certain vibrations within our Space Time and not allow for any real deviations. Just something this vid made me think of, would love to hear from any real physicists.
I have listened to many of your interviews now and I have not liked any of them. It is amazing how you can talk and talk and still have 0 information to offer. You should go into politics!
The God of Abraham. The God of the bible. I've seen claims of anywhere between 2000 to 12000 gods. Most all of them can be quickly dismissed. And you're left with the 4 big ones. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism. From there one will conclude at the claims of the Man from Nazareth. And the resurrection clarifies that He was indeed the Only Begotten Son of God and God incarnate.
@@kenelyon795 the 3 main abrahamic religions are jewdaism, christianity and islam. They all worship the same god. The god of abraham. Hinduism have many gods,
I have major problems with people like this! there's nothing to support the idea it's all what you believe, what ever happened to a scientific approach with factual evidence? it's all belief isn't it? isn't it better just to say we don't know! than too come up with an idea that seems plausible? I am not the smartest person so I might be missing somthing here.
Our universe is not only fine tuned, it is also elegant in explanation. How lucky we were...
Right, all that sickness, and skull crushing, and enormous bloodshed and torture, how lucky we are.
@@perplexedmoth Yes in a sense, because here we are today!
@@perplexedmoth Well, it's either that or total nonexistence.
I dislike the connotations of the term designer, but Collins is essentially correct. Multiverse theory is predicated solely on getting round the problem of fine tuning, and as such is unnecessarily inflationary. There is no evidence for multiverses scientifically, they simply short cut a philosophical problem.
Fine tuning isn't a problem. It's an unsubstantiated assertion and an argument from ignorance. Fine tuning needs to be demonstrated, not asserted.
Neither does multiverse theory. There is no reason to conclude that because one planet appears to have a delicately balanced system in a universe of immutable laws, that there must be a proliferation of other universes to allow it to occur. We only have a single perspective, we can't extrapolate from it. If there are other universes why can't they resemble the theist's heaven and hell? Because multiverse theory is based on the elimination of a deity as a principal aim. Let's not be coy about the motivation. If you disagree with deities on philosophical grounds, multiverse are no answer to them. Indeed, they function of the same irrefutable basis.
String theory, M-theory, multi universes, the Copenhagen interpretation, QM are all readily available to read via Google. I'm not adding or detracting from them in any way as conceptual models. What I'm suggesting is multiverse theory is not a model testable by science, there is no evidence for it, it gets cosmology out of a hole which was previously taken by the ontological primitive known as God (allowing for the variations in taxonomy).
To offer multi-universes as somehow more "scientific" than a creative mind-at-large is misplaced, and mostly ideologically motivated. Physicalism is necessarily prejudiced against mind as an active agent, and is forced upon inflationary hypotheses to avoid it.
Jorgesthegreatness, yes, that's my point. There is no reason to assume that if the parameters were slightly different there would be no universe or no life. It's like growing up in a rain forest and thinking that if conditions were slightly different there could be no life. It's true that if the conditions were slightly different there would be no rainforest, but so what. There would be savannah, or shrub land, or boreal forest, or any number of other bio-zones. It's not that the parameters of the universe are fine tuned to ensure the evolution of our universe, but that our universe evolved as it did because the parameters are as they are. Change the parameters and we get a different universe, just as if we change the temperature, humidity, soil ph, etc, you get a different bio-zone.
I'm not sure what you are "very strongly disagreeing" with? I'm following the letter of multi-universe theory. Can you show evidence for a single one of the billions of other universes consistent with MUT? There are plenty of non-dualistic theories of mind, Idealism for instance. Not to mention the data offered by Radin's experiments on the observer effect, which are consistent with the century old predictions of quantum physics.
If God is omnipotent, all tasks are equally easy. If any task requires effort, then God is not omnipotent. Therefore, all tasks for God are infinitely easy. If creating a universe required an "act of will" it would not be infinitely easy. Whether multiverse "exist" in any human sense is irrelevant to God, because if there was any practical difference then God would not be omnipotent.
If multiple universes, what if they are all fine tuned in some way? Multiple fine tuned universes would support the argument for God.
I have so many issues with the multiverse theory, but I do think it would be a good possible explanation for fine-tuning. Hatch enough Pikachu eggs in a Pokemon game and it's a statistical certainty you will eventually get ones with perfect stats. Predict a certain order of a deck of cards, and it may take longer than the universe exists to shuffle the deck and the result be that exact order. But given enough time, it would happen. Also there's the monkeys typing on typewriters thing. I don't think it would be possible in billions or trillions of years, but maybe infinity...
"Did God Create Multiple Universes?"
An utterly idiotic question!
Yes. You wanna know about it?
Probability is important to keep from deviation:
Probability of getting 1 on a die is 1/6 and that of having the cosmological constant of our universe is 1/1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. This leads us to why believe in God and not crazy assumptions.
Learn probability.
Could both multiverse and fine tuning come from mathematics and information processing?
0:25
Parallel Universe
Let's assume that the multi-verse/bubble-verse theory is correct. Would all spring from one inflation, whether ours or any other down the line? If so then wouldn't the underlying fabric of Space Time be the same in all? If that is correct and we allow for either String Theory or QLT to also be correct, then perhaps there would be no dramatic difference in the "fine tuning" between Universes. Strings/Loops could be confined to only certain vibrations within our Space Time and not allow for any real deviations. Just something this vid made me think of, would love to hear from any real physicists.
There are also at least three types of levels in the multiverse explanation. Look it up.
Spontaneous conscious unembodied boltzman brain is vastly more likely in multiverse ? Really robin? By what mechanism? Or is it just your assertion?
I have listened to many of your interviews now and I have not liked any of them. It is amazing how you can talk and talk and still have 0 information to offer. You should go into politics!
No! Alan Guth did !!
What god?
Indeed
The God of Abraham. The God of the bible. I've seen claims of anywhere between 2000 to 12000 gods. Most all of them can be quickly dismissed. And you're left with the 4 big ones. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism. From there one will conclude at the claims of the Man from Nazareth. And the resurrection clarifies that He was indeed the Only Begotten Son of God and God incarnate.
@@kenelyon795 the 3 main abrahamic religions are jewdaism, christianity and islam. They all worship the same god. The god of abraham. Hinduism have many gods,
I have major problems with people like this! there's nothing to support the idea it's all what you believe, what ever happened to a scientific approach with factual evidence? it's all belief isn't it? isn't it better just to say we don't know! than too come up with an idea that seems plausible? I am not the smartest person so I might be missing somthing here.
Which person are you talking about?
no!
Did God Create Multiple Universes? ....... no......I'm going off this channel
bye
Yea, they created themselves
It's just a question. Why should it bother you?