Hacker News Reader

Comment by LegitShady | Hacker News Reader

There is no evidence that there are infinite universes and indeed the belief in such a concept absent any evidence beside "nothing says there can't be" by scientific people is a religious belief on the order of there being a god except with less elf honesty.

We have never detected an alternate universe and we don't even have math that makes it probable. It's just a concept. The same way "there's no reason entropy can't run backwards according to the physics" doesn't stop us not having any evidence for backwards running entropy or negative mass or a million other things that might conceivably exist but have no real evidence but sound cool.

View on HN

The most philosophically and mathematically consistent interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is that there are "many worlds". This is a very strong hint (but not proof, per-se) that there isn't a singular, unique Universe in the classical sense.

In other words, there is a continuum of possibilities where all scenarios consistent with the laws of physics are played out.

Note that this is not evidence (not even circumstantial) that there are other universes with different laws of physics. Just universes with different states or boundary conditions.

Still though, if MWI is true, then there are effectively infinite possibilities in which the chance of life occurring somewhere approaches certainty.

> The most philosophically and mathematically consistent interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is that there are "many worlds".

Why is "many worlds" the most mathematically consistent? (I won't bother asking for the philosophical bit; I'm sure it's too long for an HN post.)

We have no evidence that we are randomly distributed over some population of universes, but that doesn't stop misguided philosophers from assuming that. I didn't assert infinite universes; rather the opposite. It's reasoning like this that is asserting other universes. One thing is certain; ours is super weird and has definitely produced self-aware apes in a long series of evolutionary accidents on a single planet.

What's more interesting is whether our universe can be described by finite information (closed formulae or not, even a stupidly huge but finite trace of all quantum events would suffice). If it's finite information then its description is encoded in every transcendental number in mathematics--which is an infinite number, including the number pi.

Don't trifle with infinity. I wasn't.

Having any belief at all, none, one, many, infinite, all falls into the same category. We don't know.

To me it seems like the additional universes in this context serve a purpose similar to (my understanding of) additional dimensions in math/physics. It allows you to navigate around singularities.

> Having any belief at all, none, one, many, infinite, all falls into the same category. We don't know.

If you have no evidence for it, your belief in a multiverse is religious not agnostic.

>To me it seems like the additional universes in this context serve a purpose similar to (my understanding of) additional dimensions in math/physics. It allows you to navigate around singularities.

This is additional dimensions in physics, and we just don't have any actual evidence that a multiverse exists. We have a some suppositions that say 'well there's nothing to say it couldn't exist' but no evidence that it could.

You could view that as 'useful' but you can't judge its truthfulness or whether reality reflects such a 'purpose'. Either something exists or it doesn't, and a multiverse is a strictly religious belief at this point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com