Observation suggests multiple Big Bangs and multiverse

[scourge]

Still, why would any of this necessitate the hand of any conscious agency over happy probability? That is the essential question we do not have the means to resolve.

[WAAAAAAGH!]

I would say that we are homosapien because this is the "best" form in this universe to contain our consciousness.

[BillHopkins]

My beliefs are justified by logic and experience, just like yours : )

Perhaps you should look into the "intellect", and realise that it encompasses more than just rationality.  The irrational aspect of human experience has been overlooked since the Enlightenment, to disastrous effect.  We have more tools at our disposal than you may like to believe, at the moment, but they're there whether we use them or not.

No shit! I love those parts of the intellect. But not when we have our 'what is the world like, in itself' hats on!

This sounds dangerously like post-modern squirm.

The methodology of science is great, as I think I've said before.  Establishing the mechanics of the universe is a noble pursuit.  However, reducing the cosmic machine to its smallest moving parts and claiming those to be the be all and end all of existence is foolishness.  It's like denying the information on the screen because, in reality, a computer is nothing more than a load of transistors blinking on and off (with some peripherals if you're lucky!).

The 'essence' of science (heh!) isn't reducing the cosmic machine to its smallest moving parts...'. The essence of science is empiricism. If empiricism has eventually reduced reality to it's smallest moving parts that is because this has resulted in the most amount of confirmed experiments!

And anyway, science deals with more than just famdamental particles. There are universal constants, forces, etc. These are trying to be unified, but I don't know if this will result in 'smallest moving parts'.

[Aeternum]

Well, of course there would be multiple universes,

But the fact that we can observe them is thrilling!

[scourge]

A universe is bounded by the reach of its light and gravity. We can't directly verify any others. The total dark energy discrepency offered us a possibility for a multiverse as a way to solve the discrepency.

[username]

Well, a UNIverse is selfcontaining. There can be nothing "outside" it, as there EXISTS nothing but the real, the real universe. All "else" is nonexistence.

Langan/Wheeler said thus something like this : That it is the feedback loop where two mirrors reflect a beam of light between each other. It's selfcontaining, but the universe has only one mirror. That's the "explanation" of monism.



Some are talking about decoherent multiverses, which is something else than different universes "existing"  in nonexistence paralle to each other.