Would a Multiverse be Finite or Infinite?

JamesAnthony

Temporal Navigator
Alot of theories on Time travel hit stumbling blocks when considering the Grandfather Paradox - ie By killing your grandfather in the past, you will prevent the killer of your grandfather being born.

One excuse which I have always found interesting is the multiverse theory or many-worlds theory. It implies that every action we make is offset by an opposite reaction made by a version of ourselves in a different universe.

Such a theory provides a possibility for time travel - the grandfather you killed, was only the possible grandfather of another version of yourself. Upon returning to your departure time, you find that history has not been altered for you, but there is now another time-line working very different now.

Seems a nice solution - or is it...

We must try to understand the structure of this Multiverse.
1. Does every universe begin at the same time - a finite although incredibly large number of universes?
2. or an every expanding 'tree-like' structure of the universe - every possible course of action creates a new 'branch'

1. Interesting. If a time traveller were to travel from set universe A to the past of universe B, would this time traveller, let's call him Hector, be an anomaly in Uni-B? Lets take a step back - Uni-B exists as a separate existance to Uni-A. Uni-B is already mapped out to exist as a counterpoint for an infinite number of world-lines. The arrival of Hector means that his existance there has no counterpoints. How can he? The number of world-lines are finite. Of course it is possible that a conterpoint of Hector would be born at some point in Uni-B, but this Hector would travel back to the past of Uni-C. Uni-B and Uni-C are different. The existance of Hector in both worldlines does not constitute a universally defined counterpoint. Consider that TimeTravelling Hector in the past of Uni-B, alters history and stops the Uni-B version of himself from being born. Uni-C now remains unaffected by time travel unless of course there is a Hector born in this universe who travels to Uni-D...

My point is that a finite Multiverse cannot cope with time travellers without destroying the very nature of what a parallel universe should be. There should have only been a small change between Uni-B and Uni-A, but this change has suddenly become much much greater!

2. OK, then. Verion 2 must be correct then. Hector travels back along the 'branches' to point in history common to Uni-A and Uni-B. His very arrival there creates a new branch Uni-C. Now my reasoning suffers a problem... Do Hector's possible actions each create a new branch/universe? Does that mean a there are now an huge number of universes now created that weren't there before Hector time travelled? If his actions are only minor, and a Hector is still born in each of them, then what happens when they each travel back in time? Each of them creates many, many new universes in which many, many, many, many Hectors return to the past creating many.... you get the idea I hope!!

Can the multiverse feasibly contain this infinitely expanding cycle?

Just a thought...
 
I posted this message on another thread:

The one concept that John talked about that I don't personally agree with is the multiple timeline theory where everything that can happen has happened somewhere. I am a firm believer that I could not have possably done anything differently (creating other timelines) because everything I've done was done because I thought that it was the best thing to do based on what my priority was at the time and my knowledge at the time. I am confident that this applies to all people. So no one would do anything differently if they went back in time and didn't retain their knowledge of the future. The difference that John described such as different teams winning football games, etc., is simply the result of probabilities. Much the same way that flipping a coin would produce. If you watched someone flip a coin and then went back 30 seconds in time and watch them again, there would still be a 50% chance that the same side of the coin would come up. Similarily, if two well matched football teams play, one team may win once, the other the next time.

In other words, I believe there is only one past and only one future, but infinite possabilities for either. However, I do not believe in the paradox theory that if I went back in time and killed my father before I was concieved that I would disappear, or that if I stopped a time machine from being built then my time machine would disappear. In the first case, I would be "parentless." My mother would not be aware of having given birth to me. In the second case I would have the only time machine in existence. It's like breaking the mold where the past was the mold that made me or the time machine.

Furthermore, I do believe that if I went back in time and prevented something from happening that had historical significance and then returned to the present that I would notice significant differences, but I would be the only one to notice the difference. For everyone else, things would have changed instanttaneously and no one would be aware that it was ever different. This is the reason why no time traveler in John's 2036 would ever admit to causing any changes. No one else would know so why tell them something that could possably get yourself in trouble? Or that they would have trouble believing? Until someone personally knew that they wouldn't know. Apparently John hadn't experienced it yet, questioned what he did notice, thought that it was due to "worldline varience", or was simply passing on what he was taught regardless of whether he believed it or not much as religions do today.

I just want to add that the universe is a paradox already. I do not want to discuss my spiritual beliefs here now to explain but there is not a structual problem that would occur if there were two or three of me existing simultaneously, or if I killed my father before I was concieved and yet still existed. Christians would call it a miracle. They term anything a miracle that does not have a logical explanation that can be proved. There would be a logical explanation for my existence (I was born then removed all proof) but no proof of the explanation, hense the term miracle. There are instances of people "materializing" objects out of thin air (check out "The Occult World" by A.P. Sinnett) and making objects disappear into thin air. People have levitated objects and made ordinary objects like tables so heavy that ten people could not pick it up (that was done in front of an audience of over 100 aristocrats. The same table was levitated first.) The simple explanation (but hard to believe) is that physical reality is no more real than our dreams but our minds make it real, like in the movie the Matrix. The movie was heavily based on Buddhism but laden with Biblical significance as well. The movie was actually a very good representation of reality, but there is a lot of symbolism such as "the machines" being symbolic of atheists and "Neo" being symbolic of the second coming of Christ.
 
Actually it is the physicists that bring that up as an explanation although there are others.

In other words, since 1995, 58% of the physicists believe that there are multiple universes.

Probably some more now!

How these universes are made is another question, as Dr. Hawking has been thinking on!

If such a multiverse (superverse) exists, it may be infinite, and the Laws of Thermodynamics may have to be re-written or changed to accomodate all of that proposed "theory".
All of this is brought up because of "Quantum Theory", although there is a great deal of debate on it all!

My Theory:

Time is the only dimension, and had to exist before any energy became, or anything else, and all the other dimensions are merely reflections (derivatives) from the only dimension of "Time". Call it SuperTime, or so.

But now it is nap time!
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
Actually I do believe in multiple universes because I believe that every consciousness is a seperate universe. They "come together" to form physical, objective "reality." To change physical reality it is only necessary to convince every consciousness that is affected by the change (would be aware of it) that it has changed. Obviously, this is no simple task, especially considerring that even atoms have consciousness because they are aware that they exist (I know that most people will not accept that but I wanted to point out why I believe changing physical reality through belief is difficult)
 
JamesAnthony,

You're correct. The number of universes would be finite - though that number would be incredibly large.

It should be on the order of 10^80 times the total possible quantum states for each sub-atomic particle where 10^80 is approximately the number of sub-atomic particles in each universe (Boson and Lepton numbers should be conserved thus the same for each universe). The total possible quantum states for a single sub-atomic particle can be calculated and is a rather small number.
 
It should be on the order of 10^80 times the total possible quantum states for each sub-atomic particle where 10^80 is approximately the number of sub-atomic particles in each universe (Boson and Lepton numbers should be conserved thus the same for each universe). The total possible quantum states for a single sub-atomic particle can be calculated and is a rather small number.

Thanks Darby,

interesting to see a physics-based and logical definition placed on the number of parallel universes. It throws up an interesting point - if the multiverse is finite, then what the hell has parallel universes got to do with choice? Think about it. If every choice we could make exists in an alternate reality, then that should exponentional increase the number of universes every time we make a choice. If we make a choice every second then we reach this value of 10^80 in under 4.5 minutes. You can do the math yourself - 2^316 = 1.1857*10^80...

That's just assuming that one person makes the choices defining a multiverse! What about everything else that happens not only on our own world, but also everywhere else in our universe!!

Actually it is the physicists that bring that up as an explanation although there are others.

In other words, since 1995, 58% of the physicists believe that there are multiple universes.

I'm just curious - I don't have the time to check it myself, but do these physicists believe in multiple universes dependent on our actions and choices or simply that there are many layers to our own perception of the universe - like Darby suggested...

Actually I do believe in multiple universes because I believe that every consciousness is a seperate universe. They "come together" to form physical, objective "reality."

Very interesting idea. It supports Quantum theory and allows for Time travel although the latter could have detrimental effects down the line. If one of these seperate universes gones in a totally different direction due to the incursion of a time traveller from a different universe, how long can this lone universe travel its path without reality crumbling...

James
 
I read (and believe) that the number of universes (and particles) is finite at any given moment but changes every moment. In otherwords, we can use a formula to guess, but it will never be precise. Once I heard that the universe has a diameter of 10^15 light years. Of course the universe is growing so that figure was inaccurate the moment it was calculated even if it was accurate at one time.
 
Top