Prev: Zonal swishing at the Earth's core
Next: BBC News Q&A: Professor Phil Jones
From: Ron Dean "Ron on 12 Feb 2010 14:46

In the January '10 issue of American Scientist there is an
article entitled, "Looking for Life in the Multiverse.

The title strikes me as rather bizarre. We do not know
with certainty whether or not life beyond earth exist
in the universe we know. But several articles have
appeared in national publications in recent months
regarding discussing multiverses.
These questions in my mind is this:
1) Is there empirical evidence for this multiverse?
2) If so, what is the evidence?
3) If there's no objective or empirical evidence; why
is this multiverse a legitimate subject for modern science?
From: BURT on 12 Feb 2010 15:30
There is only one hypersphere/universe. They could not exist without
God.

Mitch Raemsch
From: Antares 531 on 12 Feb 2010 18:23
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:46:37 -0500, Ron Dean <"Ron Dean"@email.com>
wrote:

>
>In the January '10 issue of American Scientist there is an
>article entitled, "Looking for Life in the Multiverse.
>
>The title strikes me as rather bizarre. We do not know
>with certainty whether or not life beyond earth exist
>in the universe we know. But several articles have
>appeared in national publications in recent months
>regarding discussing multiverses.
>These questions in my mind is this:
>1) Is there empirical evidence for this multiverse?
>
Dark matter may be as close as we'll come on this question.
>
>2) If so, what is the evidence?
>3) If there's no objective or empirical evidence; why
>is this multiverse a legitimate subject for modern science?
>
Like all theories, this one is still in the testing phase. It takes a
leap of faith to go along with this or any other theory, including the
existence of God.

Unfortunately, objective testing of SS-M Theory would require
resources WAY beyond anything we can provide, currently. It may be
that some day we will understand this better and be able to test it
with less extravagant means, but not yet. A particle accelerator that
could even approach this level of testing would have to be about as
long as the Milkeyway Galaxy diameter, and it would require about as
much energy as the total output of the sun, during its entire
lifetime.
From: Mahipal7638 on 12 Feb 2010 21:27
On Feb 12, 2:46 pm, Ron Dean <"Ron Dean"@email.com> wrote:
> In the January '10 issue of American Scientist there is an
> article entitled, "Looking for Life in the Multiverse.
>
> The title strikes me as rather bizarre. We do not know
> with certainty whether or not life beyond earth exist
> in the universe we know. But several articles have
> appeared in national publications in recent months
> regarding discussing multiverses.
> These questions in my mind is this:
> 1) Is there empirical evidence for this multiverse?

Yes, you and me live in one of them multiverses.

> 2) If so, what is the evidence?

Got pulse?!

> 3) If there's no objective or empirical evidence; why
> is this multiverse a legitimate subject for modern science?

Humans have been wasting time and bits discussing MegaHelens, hoping
for a mere 100 or so of them per Self, so we can talk (aka write)
until the multil-endless-bits run dry.

Enjo(y)..
...
Mahipal
Cheers since 1895. Before that, who gives a f...

From: BURT on 12 Feb 2010 21:54
On Feb 12, 3:23 pm, Antares 531 <gordonlrDEL...(a)swbell.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:46:37 -0500, Ron Dean <"Ron Dean"@email.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >In the January '10 issue of American Scientist there is an
> >article entitled, "Looking for Life in the Multiverse.
>
> >The title strikes me as rather bizarre. We do not know
> >with certainty whether or not life beyond earth exist
> >in the universe we know. But several articles have
> >appeared in national publications in recent months
> >regarding discussing multiverses.
> >These questions in my mind is this:
> >1) Is there empirical evidence for this multiverse?
>
> Dark matter may be as close as we'll come on this question.
>
> >2) If so, what is the evidence?
> >3) If there's no objective or empirical evidence; why
> >is this multiverse a legitimate subject for modern science?
>
> Like all theories, this one is still in the testing phase. It takes a
> leap of faith to go along with this or any other theory, including the
> existence of God.
>
> Unfortunately, objective testing of SS-M Theory would require
> resources WAY beyond anything we can provide, currently. It may be
> that some day we will understand this better and be able to test it
> with less extravagant means, but not yet. A particle accelerator that
> could even approach this level of testing would have to be about as
> long as the Milkeyway Galaxy diameter, and it would require about as
> much energy as the total output of the sun, during its entire
> lifetime.

If dark matter composes most of the universe it would be part of
everything including the Earth's mass and then surface. You cannot
keep it outside because it has most of the gravity. It originated at
the Big Bang with normal matter.

If all this is not true then there is No Dark Matter.

Mitch Raemsch
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Zonal swishing at the Earth's core
Next: BBC News Q&A: Professor Phil Jones