Multi-verse Paradox?

Foundations of physics and/or philosophy of physics, and in particular, posts on unresolved or controversial issues

Multi-verse Paradox?

Postby RArvay » Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:12 am

Guth’s dictum regarding the multi-verse is that everything that can happen must happen, and must happen an infinite number of times.
Is this a scientifically reasonable conjecture? Let’s start from infinity.

One of the peculiar statements of mathematicians is that there are an infinite number of finite integers.
This statement is predicated on the following straightforward algorithm of recursion, that is,
where N is set to the value of N = 1, let N = N + 1, repeat ad infinitum. Case closed?

No. There is a conceptual flaw in using recursion to support the peculiar statement. The flaw is that it implies that infinity can be
reached by counting with finite increments. It can’t. Therefore, since the recursion can never reach infinity, it fails to demonstrate
an infinite number of finite integers. There is a difference between the semantic definition of “endless,” or “limitless,” and the
mathematical value of infinity, a value which is distinguishable from any finite value by unique properties,
such as for example, half of infinity equals infinity.

What is the relevance of this to physics?
It involves the hypothesis that there are many universes, each of which is defined by physical constants which in turn, are set at random.

For example, our universe is governed by twenty-seven (some will say 26) physical constants, such as for example, the gravitational constant.
For some reason, the gravitational constant is neither too high, nor too low, but is just within the right range
to permit the formation of planets that can sustain life.

This gives rise to the fine tuning problem. In other words, it is extremely unlikely— unimaginably unlikely— that all 27 of the physical constants
could be so precisely set (finely tuned) as to permit our universe to sustain life (moreover, conscious, reasoning, technological societies).
Because it is so unlikely, it is unreasonable to propose that our universal constants were determined by chance, unless we propose the MUH.

To avoid the unreasonableness, it is necessary to propose the multi-universe hypothesis (MUH).

The MUH simply states that whereas one explosion in one print shop cannot be expected to result in a copy of Encyclopedia Britannica,
a sufficiently large number of explosions in a sufficiently large number of print shops would be very likely (eventually) to produce such a copy.
As the number of explosions increases, the likelihood of our universe forming by chance approaches certainty (100 percent).

It has been pointed out that the MUH is unscientific due to a lack of any sufficient physical evidence. Also, it is not falsifiable (verifiable).
There is also a mathematical reason to suspect its validity, which arises from the laws of chance.

The MUH relies upon probability. This at first seems not to be a difficult hurdle, since quantum physics also relies on probability.
In fact, it is an impossible hurdle.

It is impossible because probability cannot operate except within nonrandom parameters. For example, a die roll can be said to have
one chance in six of “landing a six.” But this is true only for six-sided dice. If the die is twelve-sided, the chance is cut in half.
If the die is four-sided, the chance becomes zero.

If MUH is to be accepted as a reasonable conjecture, then some explanation must be made to account for the nonrandom parameters
which form the a priori conditions that give rise to bubble universes.
Do all bubble universes have twenty-seven physical constants (parameters), or can they have more than that, or fewer?

If the number can be unequal to 27, then how much variation from that number is possible?
Furthermore, what is the possible range of each parameter? Is the range finite or infinite?

One possible way out of this problem of nonrandom parameters is to propose that, so to speak, there are an infinite number of dice,
and each die can have up to an infinite number of “sides.” This could result not only in an infinitely large MUH, but indeed,
in an infinite number and variety of multi-universes, an infinity of infinities.

Only in this manner could nature realize Guth’s dictum that everything that can happen must indeed happen, and happen an infinite number of times.
Moreover, it would remove any limit to the range of the possible.
The new dictum becomes, “Everything (that is to say, anything) can happen. Everything must happen.”

Can there be an infinite number of die rolls with infinite numbers of sides?
If so, then what would be the chance of a universe such as ours forming at random? Might it be undefined?

Or is it more reasonable to ask, what sets the NON-random parameters to begin with?
.
RArvay
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:14 am

Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 83 guests

cron
CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library