Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorTrim
    • CommentTimeMar 4th 2010 edited
     
    Source New Scientist

    Multiverse

    A measure for the multiverse

    Hybrid Fusion

    Hybrid fusion: the third nuclear option

    Seems great, the Chinese plan to build one.
  1.  
    That's just what we need, a Chinese Multiverse.
  2.  
    Posted By: alsetalokinThat's just what we need, a Chinese Multiverse.


    Yeah, but it is nice to know that no matter which universe you're in you can still get some good Moo Shu pork.
  3.  
    Yum. The multiverse of dim sum.
    Sounds like Spadina, south of College and north of Dundas.
    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    What gets me is what has always got me-why is it that people think of the multiverse as consisting of separate "universes" with some sort of "membrane" between them? What is at the boundary between universes if there is a "multiverse" (that old liminality problem once again). And if a universe is somehow defined by its "rules" (its mathematics?) then is it the case that all universes share some of the maths but the universes other than ours have some "different" maths? And if there are some shared "maths" (think eg a two dimensional universe, "our" universe and one with more dimensions than ours) are the universes contiguous or rather somehow coexistent in the same basic "space" except wsith other dimensions filled with extra/different "rules"? What is it that would make such other universes distinct from ours? Only the fact that we only perceive the operation of certain rules?
    • CommentAuthorUtD_Grant
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    What is it that would make such other universes distinct from ours? Only the fact that we only perceive the operation of certain rules?


    I think I read somewhere that it was something to do with 'dust' and 'daemons' and a very, very sharp knife. There may also have been some passing mention of talking armoured polar bears.
    • CommentAuthorYAFFP
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    The idea of multi-verse is simply bad logic.

    The universe is everything and so it is not a part of a greater whole.

    The idea of an infinite number of universes is science fiction promoted it seems by people that want to have a neat ending for a bad theory.
  4.  
    Posted By: loremanWhat gets me is what has always got me-why is it that people think of the multiverse as consisting of separate "universes" with some sort of "membrane" between them? What is at the boundary between universes if there is a "multiverse" (that old liminality problem once again). And if a universe is somehow defined by its "rules" (its mathematics?) then is it the case that all universes share some of the maths but the universes other than ours have some "different" maths? And if there are some shared "maths" (think eg a two dimensional universe, "our" universe and one with more dimensions than ours) are the universes contiguous or rather somehow coexistent in the same basic "space" except wsith other dimensions filled with extra/different "rules"? What is it that would make such other universes distinct from ours? Only the fact that we only perceive the operation of certain rules?
    Jean Luc, please stop being so linear! (Q to Cpt. Picard)
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    Posted By: YAFFPThe idea of multi-verse is simply bad logic.

    The universe is everything and so it is not a part of a greater whole.

    The idea of an infinite number of universes is science fiction promoted it seems by people that want to have a neat ending for a bad theory.


    It certainly seems untestable by definition, which makes it bad science, at least.
    •  
      CommentAuthorTrim
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    How do you test for infinity?
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010 edited
     
    The idea of a multiverse seems to be that there are several everythings. How do you test for that?

    One suspects that the idea really comes down to " things far away ( perhaps in unknown directions) may be very strange indeed". That is at least logically testable, though perhaps not in finite time. However, if that's what is meant, it needs a new name
    • CommentAuthorUtD_Grant
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    Posted By: TrimHow do you test for infinity?


    Click here.
  5.  
    No, here!
  6.  
    Or how about an infinite blonde joke?
    •  
      CommentAuthorterry1094
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    Divide by zero and see if it equals 1.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    Posted By: terry1094Divide by zero and see if it equals 1.


    That's a test for zero (!)
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    Posted By: Angus
    Posted By: terry1094Divide by zero and see if it equals 1.


    That's a test for zero (!)


    Perhaps you mean " divide something by it and see if you get nothing."
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010 edited
     
    Posted By: Angus
    Posted By: Angus
    Posted By: terry1094Divide by zero and see if it equals 1.


    That's a test for zero (!)


    Perhaps you mean " divide something by it and see if you get nothing."


    ETA sorry for duplicat - stupid iPhone.

    ETA again. Aaaaaaargh!
    •  
      CommentAuthorTrim
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010 edited
     
    There's an infinity of numbers. There's an infinity of even numbers. There's an infinity of odd numbers. There's an infinity of prime numbers. Etc,etc, etc. In combinations (n-1 = n) that is if you have three letters say A B C then the number of combinations of two letters out of three is three AB, AC, BC in the case of n=3 then the numbers of combinations of n-1 two in this case is n three so if you had the alphabet the n number = 26 so the combinations of 25 separate letters would = n 26. Therefore it follows that the second largest number infinity minus one would have an infinite number of combinations in infinity. n-1 = n. Infinity is even bigger than 42.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2010
     
    Posted By: TrimThere's an infinity of numbers. There's an infinity of even numbers. There's an infinity of odd numbers. There's an infinity of prime numbers. Etc,etc, etc. In combinations (n-1 = n) that is if you have three letters say A B C then the number of combinations of two letters out of three is three AB, AC, BC in the case of n=3 then the numbers of combinations of n-1 two in this case is n three so if you had the alphabet the n number = 26 so the combinations of 25 separate letters would = n 26. Therefore it follows that the second largest number infinity minus one would have an infinite number of combinations in infinity. n-1 = n. Infinity is even bigger than 42.


    Furthermore, there are a number of infinities of different sizes, as Cantor pointed out.