I've always laughed at the "multiverse theory". It's what modern physicists posit to muck up the discussion while getting a paycheck under the ruling paradigm.
If there are multi-verses I hereby define them as a universe - that is all that there is. Saying all that there is (Universe) can be divided is nothing but a word game - an illogical one at that.
Lol, we are all entitled to our opinions.
It's actually very logical when you accept that matter is just a form of energy, and energy is both wave and fixed at the same time with multiple outcomes always occuring.
Ofc quantum physics could be wrong and maybe macrophysics ridiculous equations which require the majority of both matter and energy to be a plug figure larger than actual energy or matter are right 😂
In the current paradigm using existing language to describe our human experience I would say that my statement is not an opinion but rather fact.
It's basic set theory.
If you define the entirety of a given set (Universe) as X, you can't later move the goal posts to say woops, I now define the entirety of the Universe set as Universe + X.
If you do then I'll point out that you're back to your original assertion - the set (Universe) is Universe + X which is now redefined as Universe.
To be clear, one can redefine their original assertion but your logical rigor is then suspect and rightfully called in to question.
IOW you subsume your own argument recursively.
Calling something a fact or believing it is doesn't necessarily correlate to it being one. All of theories are just that anyway, theories rather than laws or facts.
The observable univers requires enormous plugs anyway so where one places the goal posts isn't relevant. I would call this an erroneous equation, you disagree and that's ok.
Yet, no matter which set of theories your looking at, both say the same thing. Matter is energy and energy is both a packet and a wave with multiple outcomes occuring at the same time, which implies a multiverse rather than a universe.
(post is archived)