3 ms·

I find the idea of a fixed-size universe to be myopic. I personally align with the Quilted Multiverse Theory (albeit more fractal, than quilt): • Matter in the

by radley 2y ago

I find the idea of a fixed-size universe to be myopic. I personally align with the Quilted Multiverse Theory (albeit more fractal, than quilt): • Matter in the universe only has a finite number of ways it can rearrange itself • If the universe is infinite, patterns will eventually repeat • If the universe is infinite, there would be an infinite number of parallel universes within space Thus, if you could travel far enough, you will perceptually return to where you started. And since perception governs presence, does it matter that you're technically somewhere else? You're essentially in the same place. I also love this theory, because it means every possible form that can exist, at any point in its development, is taking place somewhere, all at the same time. https://www.worldatlas.com/space/the-quilted-multiverse-theory.html https://www.worldatlas.com/space/the-quilted-multiverse-theo...

notjoemama 2y ago
Well, except Boltzman brains kind of suggests none of that is true.
- Aardwolf 2y ago
  > The Boltzmann brain thought experiment suggests that it might be more likely for a single brain to spontaneously form in space, complete with a memory of having existed in our universe, rather than for the entire universe to come about in the manner cosmologists think it actually did. I don't think that's true though, I think it's more unlikely for a brain to form spontaneously, than a simple (simple compared to the brain) system of rules that then causes galaxies, planets and life with brains to form through interacting processes
  - patmorgan23 2y ago
    Yeah, things like Conway's game of Life illustrate that simple rules can create complex interactions
grondilu 2y ago
For what it's worth that sounds a lot like what Max Tegmark classifies as the "level 1" multiverse. https://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html https://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html
abeppu 2y ago
... are there actually only a finite number of ways matter can rearrange itself? Or are configuration spaces "actually" described by real (or complex) numbers (whether for things like distances or angles, or for things like the probability that a prepared quantum state will collapse to a given outcome)? If real (or complex) numbers are "real", then doesn't the fact that configuration states for some perceptually available region are described by R^(huge number) mean that merely traveling around in R^3 space, one _shouldn't_ expect to see repeats?
ifdefdebug 2y ago
> patterns will eventually repeat I know that theory, but isn't this a non sequitur? let's image an infinite universe with only two possible patterns. isn't it perfectly conceivable that pattern 1 occurs only once and pattern 2 infinitely often? edit: ok, "patterns will eventually repeat" is obviously true, what I meant is that "ALL patterns will eventually repeat" does not necessarily follow - which is implicit in the parallel universes thought experiment.

by radley 2y ago

notjoemama 2y ago

Well, except Boltzman brains kind of suggests none of that is true.

Aardwolf 2y ago
> The Boltzmann brain thought experiment suggests that it might be more likely for a single brain to spontaneously form in space, complete with a memory of having existed in our universe, rather than for the entire universe to come about in the manner cosmologists think it actually did. I don't think that's true though, I think it's more unlikely for a brain to form spontaneously, than a simple (simple compared to the brain) system of rules that then causes galaxies, planets and life with brains to form through interacting processes
- patmorgan23 2y ago
  Yeah, things like Conway's game of Life illustrate that simple rules can create complex interactions

grondilu 2y ago

For what it's worth that sounds a lot like what Max Tegmark classifies as the "level 1" multiverse. https://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html https://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/crazy.html

abeppu 2y ago

... are there actually only a finite number of ways matter can rearrange itself? Or are configuration spaces "actually" described by real (or complex) numbers (whether for things like distances or angles, or for things like the probability that a prepared quantum state will collapse to a given outcome)? If real (or complex) numbers are "real", then doesn't the fact that configuration states for some perceptually available region are described by R^(huge number) mean that merely traveling around in R^3 space, one _shouldn't_ expect to see repeats?

ifdefdebug 2y ago

> patterns will eventually repeat I know that theory, but isn't this a non sequitur? let's image an infinite universe with only two possible patterns. isn't it perfectly conceivable that pattern 1 occurs only once and pattern 2 infinitely often? edit: ok, "patterns will eventually repeat" is obviously true, what I meant is that "ALL patterns will eventually repeat" does not necessarily follow - which is implicit in the parallel universes thought experiment.