Others will have to speak for themselves, but for my part I give reasons why I consider that an AUH (ie more-or-less a plenitude) is the only substantially reasonable explanation for our world in http://www.physica.freeserve.co.uk/p101.htm and subsequent links. I don't mind discussing other possible reasonable approaches (and have often done so), but most of these are of course 'off-topic' as far as this list is concerned.
Alastair ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott D. Yelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 11 May 2000 09:29 Subject: Proof/insistance of multiverse/plenitude? > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > First, let me state that I am not a scientist that deals > with this stuff -- so please forgive me if I seem > naive or non-technical... but I have a question: > > Why are some people so adament about a "plenitude" or > a "multiverse" ... what proof is there that is so > convincing that the defenders of this faith are > unwilling to discuss anything else? > > Scott > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: 2.6.2 > > iQCVAwUBORpvWlpGPE+AF6qBAQEJrAQAkREGtCtxhYPHLuxWCDnrDQAG+GtA5Ypq > t7n98XosZwaPVxbYUWQ7I4tU1raiIVD6kkK0b0drqTDQtlUUUkCYacBN23GX0/k5 > vcOzHkqMj4YCddsipS3NdFq+5zUyf0bdPPL7nWFyC3Byw8bL1WQDBH8xD5TpvVd9 > khGtm0Ozd+g= > =1B50 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >