On 27 November 2017 at 16:25, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 5:07:03 AM UTC, stathisp wrote: >> >> >> >> On 26 November 2017 at 13:33, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> You keep ignoring the obvious 800 pound gorilla in the room; introducing >>> Many Worlds creates hugely more complications than it purports to do away >>> with; multiple, indeed infinite observers with the same memories and life >>> histories for example. Give me a break. AG >>> >> >> What about a single, infinite world in which everything is duplicated to >> an arbitrary level of detail, including the Earth and its inhabitants, an >> infinite number of times? Is the bizarreness of this idea an argument for a >> finite world, ending perhaps at the limit of what we can see? >> >> >> --stathis Papaioannou >> > > FWIW, in my view we live in huge, but finite, expanding hypersphere, > meaning in any direction, if go far enough, you return to your starting > position. Many cosmologists say it's flat and thus infinite; not > asymptotically flat and therefore spatially finite. Measurements cannot > distinguish the two possibilities. I don't buy the former since they also > concede it is finite in age. A Multiverse might exist, and that would > likely be infinite in space and time, with erupting BB universes, some like > ours, most definitely not. Like I said, FWIW. AG >
OK, but is the *strangeness* of a multiverse with multiple copies of everything *in itself* an argument against it? -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
