--- In [email protected], "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Jason" <jedi_spock@> wrote: [...] > > > Which logically means this theoritical "Observer" has to > > > exist outside the bubble universe. > > > > > > > IMHO, this Observer is both within and outside this universe. This could > > be the scenario if the multiverse theory is ever proved. > > Not really, the multiverse wouldn't have formed until the first > definite particles appeared about 3 mins after the big bang. It > was all a bit chaotic before that, all the forces unified - that > sort of thing, so any observer wouldn't have existed either. > >
You don't understand the Multiverse theories. Assuming an infinite universe, there are an infinite number of exact copies of our own universe, as well as an infinite number of slightly "off" copies as well as an infinite number of radically different universes, all existing simultaneously *somewhere* in THIS universe. The problem is that "universe" has two distinct meanings in the above sentence: our "universe," and others like it, are local, but extremely large (by our standards) conglomerations of space-time in a certain configuration, which we believe came about after/due-to something called "the Big Bang." The "Type I Metaverse" is merely the infinite expanse of space-time in which all "local" universes happen to exist. And "observer," in Hagelin's cosmology, is anything that collapses the wave function, not just some cosmic uber-entity. Now, Hagelin likely believes, as do I, that there is an emergent property of the totality of these observers throughout any and all of the metaverses that has its own consciousness, but what that is like is impossible to say. L.
