Scientific Theories that Can Never Be Proven True
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 окт 2022
- Video Sponsored by Ridge Wallet. Check them out here: ridge.com/sideprojects and use code "SIDEPROJECTS" to get 10% OFF on your order.
This video is #sponsored by Ridge Wallet.
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Warographics: / @warographics643
MegaProjects: / @megaprojects9649
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
#TheoriesthatCanNeverBeProvenTrue #sideprojects
Video Sponsored by Ridge Wallet. Check them out here: ridge.com/sideprojects and use code "SIDEPROJECTS" to get 10% OFF on your order.
Simon we need DTU March 8 1994 Michigan Please make it happen
Soooo, if the right type of energy (light, magnetic, heat etc) in the right form and strength could be generated and controlled to create a window or doorway between universes then it would be accepted.
Simulations, like all games, apps, and programs can often be broken. Such a good simulation as this one appears to be, might be the exception. I would not want to be the crazy man that spent his life jousting with the security code, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone did. A flaw in the code is MUCH more likely than is this being a simulation. SO. If a flaw exists then a simulation could be revealed, even crashed/modified. I find the sim.config file and become god.
String theory is broken because we have not recognized plank mass yet. If it exists then it has some quantity of mass. Zwicky was right, light gets tired. Most of the red shifting is interaction with gasses and gravity. The CBMR is tired light coming from beyond the visible universe. Only a dumbass would think light from the big bang went out there and turned around and came back.
Heat death is the most likely scenario, but it will never quite get there. The quantum vacuum energy of empty space is actually calculated to be greater than the energy of the entire universe at this point in time. None of the universe death scenarios speak of any change to the quantum vacuum. We already have a method of generating ridiculously small amounts of energy from this effect. As our computers will be more efficient, our ancestor simulations will run well past the predicted end.
Simon's great great grandpa used to stand on the street saying "if man was meant to fly, god would give him wings". Your laughing pessimism is (at this point) hyperbole.
In an alternative universe there is a full haired beardless Simon wishing he can get one view on his one channel. Turns out being bald and having a beard is the key to success
And he believes psychics are legit and he's terrified of ghosts. 😂😂😂
And genuinely believes dogs are precious and need protection
Imagine the amazing hair it must be tho..
I think that's just called Past Simon.
@@jilln1379
There’s a universe where Danny, Kevin, Sam, and ETA have a RUclips channel and keep Simon imprisoned down in the Blazement 🔥
There may be universes out there where Simon watches RUclips videos hosted by each of us, the audience 🤯
Simon is too powerful in any universe
He's watching us now!!!
Sounds relaxing tbh
That is a statistical probability
So... if the universe is indeed flat and infinite, than by the definition of infinite, any possibility that could manifest itself with our universal constants not only does exist, but exists, in its exactness, an infinite number of times. But thats just, you know, math. And *sarcasticly and dryly, with just a hint of seriousness fir effect* who said math, or the universal constants fir that matter, has to be static and unchanging througout the entirety of the iniverse in the first place.
Imagine if Relativity and Quantum Mechanics CANNOT be reconciled because they're two completely separate systems the developers working on the ancestor simulation had to use because a combined system was too complicated and hard to program. Relativity and Quantum Mechanics interact but run completely separate from another because they're two separate systems put together by two different development teams working on the same project.
Man, you're bending my brain. Love thinking about this stuff.
The fact that they don’t get along is an indication, that one or both are incorrect.
@@iteerrex8166 it’s more of an indication that there’s a whole branch of physics we haven’t yet discovered.
Your thoughts on the reason the two theories do not overlapping at the edges is probably correct. Time will tell.
"because they're two separate systems put together by two different development teams"
You mean like the Airbus A380... 🤣🤣🤣
Given the time frame between now and the end of the Universe, I feel anyone waiting that long to watch it would describe it (if they could) as The Big Let Down.
Isn’t the currently theory that the universe will silently and very slowly die, aka. living species would be dead millions of years before the universe truly dies.
@@Softlol The heat death of the universe wouldn't be inherently unsurvivable until effectively the very end. The problem is matter getting spread out so much that no new stars can form. If a sufficiently technologically advanced civilization lucks out to be able to put itself in orbit around whichever is the most massive black hole at the moment the last star dies, it could siphon off energy in an afterward otherwise completely dark universe for many times longer than it will take to reach that point.
I envy the beings that get to watch Andromeda and the Milky way collide. The night sky's will be beautiful for eons.
@@Softlol Spices? As in malange?
@@Softlol When is the era of living spices?
Simon: You could be the supreme leader!
Me: A place my family is still alive and all together.
Sad to hear. I'm not good at this sort of thing, and there are no words that can ever help really, just... sad.
the bot definitely is the insult to injury
The only thing scarier than looking into the universe and seeing everything accelerate away from you. Is knowing there's a place in the universe, you will never be able to see, where there's probably someone seeing the same thing you are. Nothing but turtles all the way down.
I had totally forgotten this. Thanks for the memories
Can totally picture Einstein going "Ach quatsch! That's just spooky action at a distance".
I can’t believe you don’t have a channel named “Simon says…” by now.
This is a good one.
I was just debating the practicality (of spending $ on projects like these) with a buddy who works as a physicist.
As an amateur/hobbyist, I argued that certain areas (for now, maybe it'll change in distant future) are pointless to research:
- Multiverse or not
- Infinite universe or not
- Time Travel (w/o proving existence of any 'croniton' particle to help control it)
etc.
Its kind of a waste of all that big brain-power and research time as well...because we have a ton of questions that should be able to be answered and definitely could use more time/effort on the subjects
Many other breakthroughs will come by trying to find out answers to those
Nothing in the realm of scientific research is a complete waste. So many things we know now were discovered when looking for something else.
Just like the first natural philosophers, it's worth answering life's smaller questions first in order to be able to answer the bigger ones later. We've been on this route for a few centuries, yet there's always a lot more to discover.
11:15 It is worth pointing out the axioms _"in order for a conscious observer to make an observation, there must first be a conscious observer."_ and _"a conscious observer can not contemplate, let alone observe, its own nonexistence."_
Weird sounding, but actually rather important.
Ok, I was continually distracted by the blue band-aid. I hope your owie gets better soon, Simon.
some people would probably say that a "scientific" theory that can never be tested, isn't really a scientific theory
Science stumbling into religion.
There was a paper written about simulation theory that stated it isn't feasible because there are not enough electrons to model the universe with a computer program. If we are in a simulation though, why would we even be allowed to test it by the simulation creator's rules?
Multi universes' is real in my head. I love dreaming and make certain every night to remind myself to remember my dreams and most of those dreams are another version of me. I can see him walk, talk, listen and interact with people I don't know what so ever know in my current life. He is sometimes a bad person, a good person and some times just completely opposite and doesn't even look like my current version. I enjoy my trips to see what my other versions are up to despite their behavior. I wonder if they dream of me?
As I agree with everything you said (since I believe the same), the way I know they dream of me is due to one simple factor: deja vu. If, when we sleep, we enter the consciousness of one our multiverse selves, then it would stand to reason that when we experience deja vu, it is due to the multiverse version of us who experienced the same situation when *we* were dreaming and living vicariously through that multiverse version.
TL;DR Yes, the multiverse versions of ourselves visit us the same way we visit them.
@@JakeSezz Just awesome! Thanks for sharing.
I wrote a story about an ancestor simulation in school in the 80s for English class.
Here is a theory for people to go through; What happened to Simon's finger to have a plaster on it?
Vajina Dentata
Poor guy ain't even got a grown up bandaid. Gotta use one of the kids.😂
I believe that no scientific theory can be proven, however if a theory cannot be disproven, it can be considered a viable theory, my father is a theoretical physicist and this is what he taught me
No thats called fake news
@@jimijamesjowitt what are you talking about? If you consider the way the universe functions as being 'fake news' you couldn't possibly understand
That is accurate, and I'm pretty sure I mentioned that in the script.
@@ThatWriterKevin sorry, I might've missed that
@@davebaker9128 It was like the first sentence lol
Simon what’s the story behind your finger and the band-aid? What happened 2-3 weeks ago from this date?
And how would those who don't even understand the current level of scientific knowledge possibly declare that something is forever unprovable? It's like Simon explaining the pronunciation of words, even in the one language he sort of knows.
Friends who uses the ridge type wallets are dumping them to me and I'm also giving them away as I have no interest but wonder why they quit using them.
the problem appears to be that of communication.... the general public seems to think that having an idea means that it has the same meaning as an actual scientific Theory....
A theory IS an idea, and you explore the idea by testing a Hypothesis using the Scientific Method, to see how the perceived results answer the hypothesis, which is testing the support for the theory under those particular circumstances.
A number of hypotheses can be tested in the course of exploring a theory.
There's no such thing as "proof" in Scientific research, just educated best guesses.
And thus ends my nostalgic rendition of teaching undergraduate biology students.
Gods, I miss academic life 😭
@@KristiContemplates a "theory" is an idea. a Theory" is a coherent group of propositions formulated to explain a group of facts or phenomena in the natural world and repeatedly confirmed through experiment or observation:.
this is the difference i am pointing out.
words matter. Use the correct term for the correct thing.
Excellent episode!
Hi Simon, I don't if you read it before making this but I would recommend Max Tegmark's Our Mathematical Universe. It is great, nerdy and defines 4 levels of multi verses. Some of which are testable and almost definitely true and some of which are untestable and we will never know. Anyway, if you like books than make your brain hurt and your eye bleed, this is the one. Great video
I personally am not a fan of the universe being truly infinite, but perhaps perpetual iike Penrose's idea of Big Bang -> expansion stops -> contraction begins -> Big Cruch -> Singularity -> Big Bang.
Though how that begun, if this is even true, will likely be forever beyond our reach to solve or at least inarguably prove.
I am *certain* that it is larger than we can ever, ever hope to comprehend. At least anytime soon.
If in a million years Humanity has evolved to be unimaginably more intelligent than we are now, then maybe we'll have a *slightly* better idea of the scale of the thing outside our tiny speck we can observe.
Having said that, the concept some believe, that in an infinite universe, literally anything that can exist, does exist, may still have some legs to it, though maybe not taken to its logical extreme.
Just perhaps things could happen that seem extremely unlikely, like perhaps a Jupiter Brain planet-sized. living, advanced supercomputer spontaneously forming instead of what we think of as normal planets?
5:18 Alan Watts, "Time and the More It Changes"
1. The multiverse is just one theory I can't get onboard with.
2. Simulation theory is very plausible.
3. String theory, don't understand it enough to have an opinion lol.
4.
Spoken like a true gamer..?
Hey Simon, just to point out that for some of these theories, scientists have come up with provable hypothesis, and for others they make come up with such hypothesis in due time, someone someday may test these and we may have results, (like before bell came up with his inequality, someone may have said the the hidden information thing is not provable or disprovable)
So while nothing can really be "proven" scientifically speaking, in due time, there may be tests that will be designed and conducted giving us insight into validity of the theories
If all potential realities exist then there exists a reality where no realities exist.
Edgar Cayce was a clairvoyant who had many readings. He would routinely lie down on a couch and go into a trance. While in the trance he was asked questions. At first he was asked to help diagnose a person's physical problems. He referenced the Akashic records and was able to help the person. He was also asked lots of many other things - including the afterlife. He explained that there are other dimensions.
Sad to think that Fact Boi's beard isn't real and that it's a just a simulation...
The Long Earth is a good read..
Terry Pratchett & sorry l forgot the co Author...also Strata by Terry Pratchett...
Incredibly intelligent man...
When l read his books with Science plots, it makes my mind fizz...and hes got Science 😎
The reason I believe in the multiverse is because nature has never created just one of anything.
That's actually the best answer I've ever heard in support of the multiverse.
Exactly. Aliens are not only real. They are a inevitable.
@@pakde8002 right?
Neil Degrasse Tyson said it.
Unless it has, I wouldn't be saying "never". I understand the notion, though.
I was thinking if we would be in a simulation, then why would they make our lives so boring and pointless? But then I thought, if there was an answer, it would be to learn what it's like to evolve as the only species that can talk to each other. At least, when evolved so far. I'm sure most life on other planets evolved talking to each other before learning to travel to other planets.
MANY animals talk to each other. What are you talking about?
@@humanicd not in a language
@@humanicd that we can decipher
The question about simulation is - even though we don't have the computing capacity for it now, computer scientists may be able to disprove it by showing that it is impossible to simulate certain analog things in a digital way.
Can they simulate radio signals and how they decay as you get further from the signal? How would that work where a transistor radio gets weaker and stronger signals depending on if you are standing behind a wall or something? How would the simulation handle that?
Can it be done?
Games right now have sounds getting softer as you move further away or if you're behind a wall.
There is already a simulation going on. It's inside your brain. The brain is modelling the world you see based on its wiring and the sensations it receives. The "you" that interacts with the world interacts with the model and then filters sensations in an attempt to reconcile the feedback with the model in your mind, updating it as need be (to an extend dependent upon the consistency of the feedback "you" receive).
You don't have to simulate the generator of a particular experience, you need only simulate the sensations a brain receives sufficient for that brain to imagine it has had an experience consistent with the experience you're trying to simulate.
Further though, depending on where in the sequence of interpretation the boundary of simulation occurs, it might be that what to "you" is you sensing something, is actually a simulation of the conclusion of a brain like yours would come to think has happened based on the feedback it receives rather than the simulation of the stimulation itself.
The basic property of a simulation is that you don't know anything about the universe in which the simulation is being run. So trying to assert claims about limitations regarding simulations is pointless because what might be a limitation here may not be a limitation in the real world.
This was brilliant!
I remember someone talking about the big problem with String Theory. He said after 70 years the physics community has made zero progress with the theory, but they continue to shove money into the theory like a bridge to nowhere. The problem is so many people have invested their careers and life on the theory to the point that going a different direction would ruin people. It could take decades or a century for physics to change course simply because too much is invested in something that doesn't work. I guess another way to look at it, is string theory is a train stuck in a loop, but no one wants to stop and switch tracks.
Topic suggestion for you with updates:
The Goiânia accident
most deadly Nuclear accident in Brazil in the 80's
For this or one of your other channels, love your stuff!
In one of my physics courses, a self-described Whovian asked our professor about multiverses. My professor (the guy dressed like Indiana Jones, hat included) said his biggest problem with the two different universes being created for each side of a choice was where all that matter and energy comes from. Like, is an entire universe, and everything in it, spontaneously created? Where is all of that stuff supposed to come from? God's bunghole?
2:00 Simon feeding Danny
As far as the multiverse goes, with some universes having talking and walking trees for example, I believe that the impossible is still impossible in all universes. For example, humans are still humans, frogs are still frogs, and trees cannot walk and talk. This theory is also true for the "infinite number of monkeys at a typewriter" scenario. If it is impossible for one monkey to randomly type out Shakespeare, then it is still impossible for an infinite amount of times.
If the multiverse didn't have "impossibilities" then there's a universe where multiversal travel is possible. If that's possible, there's a universe where a dog with 14 heads builds a machine that destroys the multiverse. There's also a universe where a fungus was born with the express purpose of stopping that machine. However there's an infinite number of both of those universes, with slight variations. If this is all true one of them must have succeeded in destroying the multiverse by now. Therefore the multiverse *must* have some rules, or just not exist.
The thing about your comparison though, is that mathematically a monkey *will* write Shakespeare with enough time. Expecting talking trees is more like giving a monkey a typewriter and expecting to yield a bicycle. The rules of this hypothetical situation could never create a bicycle, no matter how much time it was given.
There's a universe out there where Danny has the keys to the basement.
2:55 - Chapter 1 - Multiverse theory
5:25 - Chapter 2 - Simulation theory
8:20 - Chapter 3 - String theory
10:50 - Chapter 4 - The end of the universe
- Chapter 5 -
- Chapter 6 -
Could easily expand this to "every theory". It's inherent to science that none of them can ever truly be proven because we can't know for sure we discovered everything.
in one of those universes people actually use dumb wallets rather than just sticking cards in their pocket.
I had a black & white TV and Pong when I was a kid
I'm with Richard Feynman on this. In his famous Cornell University series of lectures, he said that the concept of a single universe was simply too neat and was pushed by physicists who wanted a mathematical solution to their theories. He of course was referring to Einstein. He also said that just because the speed of light fitted with another theory, Relativity, does not make it correct. He went on to say that theories are only so good until someone smarter comes along and disproves them. In the 1970s he demonstrated that there are many particles passing through the "known" universe that travel faster than light, and they also travel through matter...Neutrinos. "Where did they come from and where are they going to, then?" he asked.
But his other really famous quote that sums it all up about the origin of the universe is this: "First there was nothing. Then it exploded." The theory of matter is destroyed at a stroke, unless there was another universe before ours.
Since we haven't yet created a simulation of the universe, then we would either have to be the base reality, or the last simulation. Which has the better odds?
If a hypothesis can't be falsified it is no longer science.
Indeed. Some speculations that might be entirely correct are forever beyond proving. Like the idea that most of the anti-matter went in the 'opposite' direction in time in the Big Bang.
In the game Alpha Centauri, when you discover the String Theory tech, you hear a voice say "Einstein is rolling in his grave. Not only does God play dice with the universe, the dice are loaded."
The word ‘theory’ is highly misunderstood by the general public when it comes to understanding science. It’s unfortunate that it can be used linguistically to mean ‘i made something up’
Civilization is approaching a state of infinite entropy.
The "simulation hypothesis" is the one that bugs me the most. So many people act like its super likely and try to think it is scientifically plausible.
Like multiverse, it has no evidence, its unfalsifiable. Thus it isn't scientific but philosophical. Its basically in line with the theological thoughts within philosophy.
The one issue I have with the "nested simulations" concept is processing power. No matter how advanced we get, processing power is going to be finite.. infinite power is not a thing. So if we assume we can create a simulation that can create things down to quark or Planck scales, that is going to require massive amounts of processing power. I am perfectly fine with assuming we will reach a point where it is possible...though there is no guarantee we will.
However, if the simulated people also reach that point, and develop their own Planck scale simulation, that simulation is running within the original simulation, so the original simulation is ultimately what has to power it, meaning the processing power required just doubled. And do we think any people, base or simulated, will make just one simulation once possible? Redundancy, rivalry, or even just simultaneous development are all highly likely possibilities. So now, our original simulation is being forced to run multiple simulations of its own. And then those simulations develop to the point that they can create their own simulations. The processing power very quickly spirals out of control on the original simulation. Depending on exactly how it's programmed, that would either result in errors or it would crash entirely. In either case, we would likely see these artifacts if we're any significant number of levels down. The fact that we don't implies that we are, at the very least, only one or two layers deep. But most likely, we are base existence, because it just doesn't make sense to put the effort into simulating things down to the Planck scale, at the universal sizes. We would more than likely be able to learn whatever we want to learn without going that far. We could simulate things much more locally and with less granularity, indeed we already do.
I wonder what Danny is going in other multiverses, or is he still in a basement in the other multiverses he's in? 🤔🤔🤔
There's probably an upside-down universe wherein Simon keeps Danny prisoner in the attic.
Quantum mechanics and Relativity.
Individual Psychology verses Organisation Psychology.
He got me with his intro lol. I paused the video just before he said it too
Back in 2016 I woke up one morning and realized I was in a different verse still trying to find my way back.
Are you sure that that happened, you just might have had a moment of lucidity after some event.
The big lights out
Comment on wallet contents: Driver’s license, pilot’s license, scuba card, credit card, Kaiser membership card, debit card, WFR certification, drone license, wife’s photo and a couple stray dollar bills. And… schedule of weekly presentations by Simon Whistler.
As a long time skiffy (old fans way of pronouncing Sci fi) reader, and even a sometime writer in the field, I have always loved yhe concept of the multiverse. In fact, the first story I ever had published appeared in an anthology called ALTERNATE TYRANTS.
In other topics, I worked for a company back in the mid to late 70s that made chips for a pong clone. And my primary job there was testing. Including play-testing the packaged chips. Got a coworker whose bf was the lovcal.pizza parlor pong champ, but after a couple of months of testing these things, at a company.pizza party, I ended up beating him. Badly. BC when you have to double check and verify the bad ones, you take great joy in the good ones when you encounter them.
His little blue bandaid lol
to go further with the simulation: where does it stop if we did find out this is a simulation? if we find the "real" universe, how would we know it isn't just a simulation of a simulation going back infinitely? 🤔😵💫🤷🏼♂️
Dude, I could listen to your voice all day.
Can I hire you to come and read me bedtime stories... ha ha!
The simulations can't be infinite, as they're limited by the computing power of the machine running them all in base reality.
We simulate games where their universe rains fish, mushrooms walk, or with "mana" as a power source. I wouldn't assume that whatever is outside the simulaton is bound by our universes restrictions.
One Joy in this existence is that there's a universe out there where I am a Freddie Mercury Tribute Artist 😁
(edit: correcting autocorrect)
String theory was best explained by Frank Zappa.
Odd, This is the first time Ive ever heard that the multiverse theory was considered fact...
Yes, I thought this was purely a tool of sci-fi. That this is being seriously explored is a concern
The more acceptable name for the "many worlds theory" is the "many worlds interpretation of reality"
It's been a pleasure y'all.
In quadrillions of years after entropy and darkness has settled and quantum tunnelling begins to eat the universe will the multiverse bleed into an omniverse?
The idea of a simulation of life creating a simulation of life is the premise behind the movie The 13th Floor
Saying the multiverse theory is untestable may not be true. It is possible that as measurements of the angular power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background improve, a signature may present itself that is indicative of an uncoupling of universes within a higher dimension brane
The mass of the Higg's boson has disproved the multiverse hypothesis, it's too light. The real problem is it's too heavy for the standard model.
Alternatively they can never be proven wrong. At that point it comes down to belief vs disbelief
"Roy"
Ancestor simulation.
I already refer to "me" as an avatar of the 42
I'd rather think extra dimensional space had to exist in one flavour or another. Quantum tunneling alone is somewhat dependent on it . Explaining quantum tunneling or positrons without a "someplace else" for them to travel through requires some seriously far fetched theories. The issue really is the same as with gravity, we see what it does but really don't understand how it does it.
WTF happened to Ockham's Razor?
Gillette bought the company.
@@brodriguez11000 😀
People who think they know what Ockham's Razor is, as they backfire ironically into thinking their lack of logic is logic: "The simplest answer is always correct, because I love being trapped in a Groupthink and Confirmation Bias feedback loop, bouncing around various cognitive biases and logical fallacies!"
Middle-class berks being correct but also patronising, snooty, smug and using words the majority of working class Brits up North don't know: "Do not add excess plurality where none is required!"
A summary of Einstein's attitude, though not his actual words: "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler"
A basic requirement to a scientific theory, is being testable. If it isn't testable - it's not science, it's philosophy
2:48 multiverse theory
5:18 simulation theory
8:15 string theory
10:46 the end of the universe
So. Ive said this before. Sure, tge concept of a sim in a sim in a sim is facinating and all, but people forget that the base compute in the real world, however many layers up that is, still has to process all the sims before it.
A modern example on the smallest of scales is like when computers run virtual machines. Now imagine installing a virtual machine on a virtual machine that was installed on a virtual machine on a real computer.
The real computer still has to process all the vm ware under it. This causes problems when talking about ancestor sims. You either have tobcomtinuously simulate smaller and smaller realms, and or you have to contiuosly lower the resolution.
Those factors can be accounted for through math and observation tge same way math and observation gave us the big bang. Inference and logical leaps are very much the tools of a scientist.
And so at some point down in the sim layers, if we are in a sim, you would run into the issue of the space being to snall to properly be able to represent an infinite universe, or the resolution becomes to grainy to extract useful information. Just something to think about.
No one ever mentions the response to that Einstein quote: 'Stop telling God what to do'!
It drives me crazy when someone says “it’s just a theory”.
To the sponsor:
Well pretty easy 2 bank cards, ID, driver license, I for myself have 1 card for my work place (supermarket) to get discount there, 1 payback card, 1 card that gives discount on petrol, maybe study id if someone is still in colelge and that's already eight.
Don't like that cash has to be folded tough
So there is a Universere where Simon has no youtube channels? That's not my Universe!
If the wallet ad was modern day, then there wouldn't be a wallet. It would just be your phone. Worst case scenario, an attachment on the back of your phone if you really want to bring your ID everywhere instead of just leaving it in your car.
You mean makie-upie things in popular culture that people bang on about being real.
Bigfoot, religion, aliens...multiverse...worm holes...true love.
I have a question about Simulation Theory. What if the maid unplugs the simulator computer for the hoover?
An inter-versal portal;
Good idea or Not a Good idea?
I played Pong... thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread at the time...
Surely the ability to run a simulation inside a simulation would decrease the further down you go? Due to limited storage space and processing power of the original "real" universe?
Using only the possibility of Simulation nesting as a factor, the chance that we're the base reality is 50/50, not 1/∞. Because we have not yet created a simulation of our own to carry the chain forward, we can only be at the start of the chain, or the end of the chain. It should always be possible for us to know how far we are from the end of the chain, but figuring out how far we are from the start of the chain would require communication from the start of the chain.
What about Hyperspace travel?
My brain hurts now, lmao
GR and QM don’t get along, which implies that one or both are wrong, and all these other hypotheses are based on those two. Kinda sandy grounds to build on, don’t you think?
So… the USS Starship Voyager went to the Delta Quadrant and found another galaxy like ours with Klingons, Vulcans, and Damn Dirty Apes?
my belief for the simulation theory is that we ARE in fact in base reality, if only bc it's easier to imagine and easier on the mind
The Whistlerverse is the best. Reportedly, supposedly, Allegedly! Mashed that like button and the comment is a sacrifice to the Algorithm. Cheers.
Sorry about the band-aid, guess Danny tried to escape the basement?
I mean, The end of the universe assumes that the universe is a closed system.
The only shortcoming was that the three different types of multiverses (or their hybrids) were not distinguished.
First, if our universe is infinitely big (with a big enough aleph number), then all things that could happen (according to our laws of physics) will happen. Somewhere. Infinitely many times. But it's still the same universe; just too spread out to have any communication between its parts.
Second, every time a quantum wave function collapses due to interference/observation, the entire reality could split in two. We wouldn't share time, space or matter with the other reality because it's just not real to us. And there are a lot of wave functions around us. So the realities could double up quite quickly.
Third, the theories of cosmic inflation suggest that bubble universes could sporadically spring up within existing universes. And they could have completely different laws of physics. Most of them would not be livable but luckily, we found one that is. (Or it found us.)
Thanks for the comment, you seem to be the only commenter so far who has grasped the difference between the Everett's "Many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics and the Linde/Guth quantum fluctuation-initiated bubble universes of eternal inflation, There is an excellent discussion on this on one of Brian Greens World Science festival YT videos. Can't recall which but Both Allen Guth and Andrie Linde are on the panel.
Also I don't consider String theory to be a multi-verse theory it simply describes extra dimensions in are universe mathematically. I think. Its hard to grasp and i have imperfect knowledge on the matter. What do you think?
An infinite universe can only have so many arrangements of atoms, so they must repeat an infinite number of times.