Evidence of a multiverse?

[Jutter]

http://spaceindustrynews.com/our-univer ... ains/3945/

"scientists published a new map of the cosmic microwave background – the 'radiation' left behind after the Big Bang that created the universe 13.8 billion years ago.

The map, based on Planck data, showed anomalies in the background radiation that, some experts say, could only have been caused by the gravitational pull of other universes outside our own."

[stromboli]

So... did one god make one universe and that means there are an unlimited supply of gods, or one god made all the universes- which would explain why he is too busy to answer prayers, or- geez, this is complicated.  #-o

[AllPurposeAtheist]

So... did one god make one universe and that means there are an unlimited supply of gods, or one god made all the universes- which would explain why he is too busy to answer prayers, or- geez, this is complicated.  #-o

'He' makes all universes, but needs our money to feed his universal drug habits.

[Jutter]

...which leads me to this George Carlin in Carnegie Hall quote....

What are you? A comedian?

[josephpalazzo]

Notice the title of the article, "Our Universe Could be One Of Billions", emphasis on the 'could be".


The other problem I have with this article is that I haven't found anything so far to corroborate what it claims. One of the author cited is George Efstathiou of the Kavli Institute for Cosmology and Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge. His last publication on Planck observations (Nov. 2013), he wrote:

In summary, the discrepancies between the Planck results and the direct H0 measurements shown in Figure 5 are not
large enough to provide compelling evidence for new physics beyond the base CDM cosmology.


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.3461.pdf

[leo]

So... did one god make one universe and that means there are an unlimited supply of gods, or one god made all the universes- which would explain why he is too busy to answer prayers, or- geez, this is complicated.  #-o

Multiuniverse would make more sense than a universe popping out from nothing .

[stromboli]

Notice the title of the article, "Our Universe Could be One Of Billions", emphasis on the 'could be".

There you go, throwing cold water on the party, mr. smartypants. Shame on you.  [-X

[Jutter]

Notice the title of the article, "Our Universe Could be One Of Billions", emphasis on the 'could be".


The other problem I have with this article is that I haven't found anything so far to corroborate what it claims. One of the author cited is George Efstathiou of the Kavli Institute for Cosmology and Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge. His last publication on Planck observations (Nov. 2013), he wrote:

In summary, the discrepancies between the Planck results and the direct H0 measurements shown in Figure 5 are not
large enough to provide compelling evidence for new physics beyond the base CDM cosmology.


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.3461.pdf

This is why I was carefull enough to end my threadtitle with a questionmark.

[Solitary]

Even if there are other universes which seems ridiculous to me because universe means all there is?, it still doesn't explain how they all started, and seems like a cop out. to me.  :-k  Why can't the universe be a three sphere with no beginning or end and ever changing with us caught in the middle sphere?  :shock:  8-)  Solitary

[josephpalazzo]

Notice the title of the article, "Our Universe Could be One Of Billions", emphasis on the 'could be".


The other problem I have with this article is that I haven't found anything so far to corroborate what it claims. One of the author cited is George Efstathiou of the Kavli Institute for Cosmology and Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge. His last publication on Planck observations (Nov. 2013), he wrote:

In summary, the discrepancies between the Planck results and the direct H0 measurements shown in Figure 5 are not
large enough to provide compelling evidence for new physics beyond the base CDM cosmology.


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.3461.pdf

This is why I was carefull enough to end my threadtitle with a questionmark.

This reminds me of a few years back when Penrose claimed certain observations of the WMAP satellite had confirmed his Conformal Cyclic Cosmology Theory's predictions of pre-Bang activities, only to be debunked later on. Beware of these sensationalist front-page headlines.

[SGOS]

We've all known about this "theory" for a long time.  We entertain it as an interesting possibility, so yes, "It could be," I suppose.  The article says that this is the first evidence so far that "it could be".  Hmmm?  Articles usually say something like that to make the substance of the article itself more sensational.

Is this really the first evidence?  How about the guy that originally posited the idea?  Did he just pull the idea out of his ass, or did it come to him in a late night stoned dorm room discussion?  Or did he sense some "evidence" that made him naturally think about it?

I don't want to sound like I'm dumping on this thing.  I actually am very fond of the multiverse theory, because I think it's "way cool and far out."  Oops, wait, I sound like I'm dumping on it, again.

At any rate, this thing is still in it's infancy, probably less well accepted than string theory.  But stranger stuff is coming to light, so why not?  It could be!  There's the new watchword in Science, "It could be.  Why not?"

But when I looked at the map of background radiation, what I saw looked like a Deluxe Pizza Supreme from Little Caesars.  But then I've never been very good a reading background radiation.

[stromboli]

Currently reading "The Long War" by Terry Pratchett and Stephen Baxter, the second book in the "Long Earth" series. About the ability to step from one copy of earth to another in another dimension or universe. Fascinating read. Don't know how that lines up with this theory, but interesting nonetheless.

[josephpalazzo]

But when I looked at the map of background radiation, what I saw looked like a Deluxe Pizza Supreme from Little Caesars.  But then I've never been very good a reading background radiation.

Just to put this whole thing in perspective: you would need to study Classical physics (which was developped between 1600-1900) then Relativity (1905-1915), then Quantum Mechanics (1900-1930), then Quantum Field Theory ( 1930-1970) then QFT in curved spacetime (1970-present) and then finally you could read that "Deluxe Pizza Supreme from Little Caesars".  :P

[Solitary]

:shock:   Solitary

[josephpalazzo]

Yeah, I might do a blog on the quantum fluctuation power spectrum, which is what those "Deluxe Pizza Supreme from Little Caesars" are all about. But not now, maybe after the holidays.