Catholic FAQ


Help support Catholic Answers!

Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Philosophy
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Dec 8, '07, 1:39 pm
freesoulhope freesoulhope is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2006
Posts: 1,635
Religion: Catholic
Default Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

For years, the Big Bang theory, and cosmology in general, wasn't accepted as a ligitmate science untill fairly recently; but people reckon they have proof now; and from what i can understand its accepted as true, but has some critics. Now we have the multiverse theory. Is there any ligitimate scientific reason to think that there might be a multiverse? How can it be a possibility if time space and matter began from an infinetly dense point called a singularity? Is this just a naturalistic futile attempt to overthrow the Bigbang? Or is it a ligitimate scienctific inquiry?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Dec 8, '07, 2:29 pm
paulcosmith paulcosmith is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Posts: 18
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

I'm by no means an expert on the theory, but I don't think it's necessarily a bad theory.

One basis for the theory is that material consumed by a black hole is emitted through a white holem and the Big Bang may have been one of those white holes emitting material from another universe. I don't see that necessarily solves the "God problem" as some might put it, because there should be an initial creation event at some point in some universe. That is, there either had to be a single universe that started the multiverse, or a number of universes sprang into existence at once, which either way leaves a moment of initial creation.

Those who argue that the multiverse removes the need for God aren't thinking all the way through.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Dec 8, '07, 2:55 pm
SpiritMeadow's Avatar
SpiritMeadow SpiritMeadow is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2007
Posts: 4,060
Religion: Episcopalian
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

The theory of multiple universes like the theory of multiple dimensions is I believe the result of mathmatical calculations. But I believe math can theorically prove lots of things that have no visible means of being tested at this time. I doubt it has much if any impact on how one views God's role in creation as supreme Creator. He could I assume have zillions of universes and zillions of dimensions if He wishes.
__________________

http://afeatheradrift.wordpress.com


And when you turn to the right or when you turn to the left, your ears shall hear a word behind you saying, "This is the way; walk in it." (Isa. 30:21)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Dec 8, '07, 3:42 pm
CalmDownWisWins CalmDownWisWins is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: December 6, 2007
Posts: 935
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freesoulhope View Post
For years, the Big Bang theory, and cosmology in general, wasn't accepted as a ligitmate science untill fairly recently; but people reckon they have proof now; and from what i can understand its accepted as true, but has some critics. Now we have the multiverse theory. Is there any ligitimate scientific reason to think that there might be a multiverse? How can it be a possibility if time space and matter began from an infinetly dense point called a singularity? Is this just a naturalistic futile attempt to overthrow the Bigbang? Or is it a ligitimate scienctific inquiry?
"UNIVERSE" means the "one 'verse' of God". If it's not God's "verse", whose is it?

Since God has only ONE "verse", the term "multiverse" is inherently oxymoronic.

If our "us-verse" is not the only one, then our "us-verse" added to all the other "them-verses" would still be God's UNI-VERSE.

Those who are searching for reality will find it, as God deems it wise for them to find it.

NOTHING can "overthrow the existence of God". Certainly no pitifully weak intellection of the trivial human mind when compared to the "mind" of even the least of God's angels, much less God's mind itself.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Dec 8, '07, 3:47 pm
Wolseley's Avatar
Wolseley Wolseley is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Posts: 5,414
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Is it possible to travel to a different universe, one that's maybe a little better than this one?

Sometimes I think this one we're in was one of the early experimental models-----it has some flaws that might have been corrected in later models.....
__________________
You can have freedom of speech, or you can have political correctness. You can't have both.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Dec 8, '07, 4:13 pm
CalmDownWisWins CalmDownWisWins is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: December 6, 2007
Posts: 935
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolseley View Post
Is it possible to travel to a different universe, one that's maybe a little better than this one?

Sometimes I think this one we're in was one of the early experimental models-----it has some flaws that might have been corrected in later models.....
We are the 2.0 patchlevel 4 (2.0p4) version.

From 2.0p5 to 2.9p665 the feature set was frozen, and the functioning subsystems were stabilized, with only a slight cost in power usage, and the interface (God-Humanity) was improved slightly.

Then some very odd emergent phenomena showed up in 2.9p666.


It's looking rather dubious as to whether the investors will fund the 3.0 version, as they are looking into replacing the current developer with one of the emergent phenomena from the 2.9v666 build, as he's (the phenom) told them (the investors) that he can "fix the problem", but will need to do a complete re-write, change the product name from "ALL" to "MINE", and NEEDS all the investors credit card numbers to do so.

The investors, under pressure from "somewhere", are expected to announce the project start of the MINE 1.0p0 sometime in February (Eastern-Eternal-Standard-Time).

..the angels are NOT happy!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Dec 8, '07, 4:17 pm
Ahimsa Ahimsa is offline
 
Join Date: September 4, 2004
Posts: 5,977
Religion: Jesus Buddhist
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CalmDownWisWins View Post
We are the 2.0 patchlevel 4 (2.0p4) version.

From 2.0p5 to 2.9p665 the feature set was frozen, and the functioning subsystems were stabilized, with only a slight cost in power usage, and the interface (God-Humanity) was improved slightly.

Then some very odd emergent phenomena showed up in 2.9p666.


It's looking rather dubious as to whether the investors will fund the 3.0 version, as they are looking into replacing the current developer with one of the emergent phenomena from the 2.9v666 build, as he's (the phenom) told them (the investors) that he can "fix the problem", but will need to do a complete re-write, change the product name from "ALL" to "MINE", and NEEDS all the investors credit card numbers to do so.

The investors, under pressure from "somewhere", are expected to announce the project start of the MINE 1.0p0 sometime in February (Eastern-Eternal-Standard-Time).

..the angels are NOT happy!
You sound like The Architect from The Matrix.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Dec 8, '07, 4:24 pm
PoliSciProf PoliSciProf is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2007
Posts: 1,688
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

I once had the good fortune to spend some time talking with Father Stanley Jaki, winnner of the Templeton Prize and author of many books on science and religion. Father Jaki told me re a similiar question that the term "universe" must logically mean the totality of all things physically existing. I think this is correct. Therefore, multiple universes is a misnomer. There is still one totality of all things existing.
__________________
"That which is Catholic cannot be stupid, and that which is stupid cannot be Catholic." Re Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (cited in George Weigel: God's Choice (2005, page 166)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Dec 8, '07, 5:06 pm
ribozyme ribozyme is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 3,377
Religion: godless liberal
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Has anyone read the cosmologies of Alan Guth, Alexander Vilenkin, and Andrei Linde? Shows that multiverse can be created ad infinitum through inflation and God is no longer necessary in cosmology.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Dec 8, '07, 7:07 pm
Nullasalus Nullasalus is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: March 30, 2006
Posts: 580
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ribozyme View Post
Has anyone read the cosmologies of Alan Guth, Alexander Vilenkin, and Andrei Linde? Shows that multiverse can be created ad infinitum through inflation and God is no longer necessary in cosmology.
Ignoring the problems with past-eternal inflation, Paul Davies (not exactly an apologist) had this to say recently:

A second reason that the laws of physics have now been brought within the scope of scientific inquiry is the realization that what we long regarded as absolute and universal laws might not be truly fundamental at all, but more like local bylaws. They could vary from place to place on a mega-cosmic scale. A God's-eye view might reveal a vast patchwork quilt of universes, each with its own distinctive set of bylaws. In this "multiverse," life will arise only in those patches with bio-friendly bylaws, so it is no surprise that we find ourselves in a Goldilocks universe — one that is just right for life. We have selected it by our very existence.

The multiverse theory is increasingly popular, but it doesn't so much explain the laws of physics as dodge the whole issue. There has to be a physical mechanism to make all those universes and bestow bylaws on them. This process will require its own laws, or meta-laws. Where do they come from? The problem has simply been shifted up a level from the laws of the universe to the meta-laws of the multiverse.


Worse yet, once you start getting into past-eternal concepts, you start to beg questions about what role intelligence can play if it were eternally around in the past. Even if God is 'no longer necessary', God still remains a strong and plausible option (I speak at the bare minimum deist level of God/intelligence here. But then, cosmological arguments for God always refer to that level besides.)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Dec 9, '07, 9:35 am
bogeydogg bogeydogg is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 2007
Posts: 999
Religion: Crossing the Tiber
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

let us first seperate multiverse and universe cosmologies. Einsteinian Relativity brought forth the idea of the Big Bang. The reason that the Big Bang was not accepted for so long, even by Einstein himself i.e. the universal corrective, was because it brought cosmology back into the picture. During the late 19th early 20th century the idea of the universe was that it was static. Einstein using Rhiemann (did I spell that right) geometry postulated that the universe was expanding and the galaxies were flying away from each other. Not only that he figued out that space and time and matter were all related hence relativity. If one could wind the cosmological clock backward then the universe would cease to expand and begin to contract at which time there would be a point of non-existence and thus the universe would need a cause. This is why cosmology (the study of the origins of the universe) came back and Hume and his de facto proteges suddenly had a problem because causality was thought to have been wiped out three centuries earlier, just ask Kant. The extreme disfavor of secular astronomers and physicists is why theories such as the oscillating universe, the Hawking model, the multiverse and anthropic principles have come into existence. It is because the secular scientists hate that the universe began to exist.

However, as has been pointed out, the multiverse, while mathematically possible, does not do away with the question of it's own beginning.
__________________
Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Dec 9, '07, 11:14 am
VociMike VociMike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2004
Posts: 8,730
Religion: Catholic (revert)
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nullasalus View Post
The multiverse theory is increasingly popular, but it doesn't so much explain the laws of physics as dodge the whole issue. There has to be a physical mechanism to make all those universes and bestow bylaws on them. This process will require its own laws, or meta-laws. Where do they come from? The problem has simply been shifted up a level from the laws of the universe to the meta-laws of the multiverse.
Thanks for citing that. I'm amazed that so many people can't see what is stated here. If there is indeed an eternal universe-making thing, why does it exist and why does it behave the way it does?

What's really involved here is a form of "Anything but God" thinking. A good many people are prepared to believe in any eternal thing with arbitrary abilities, as long as that thing is not God.
__________________
"The Catholic Church is the only thing which saves a man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age."

G.K. Chesterton
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Dec 9, '07, 11:04 pm
Steadfast love Steadfast love is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 438
Religion: Neophyte
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

I think it's real science but a rubbish model, like the electrical gears and cogs that Maxwell was thinking of when he wrote his equations, the raisin pudding theory of atoms that early chemists worked with, and Colombs law as the underpinning of the totality of most of physics and all of chemistry.
__________________
Heresy lies in the sense assigned, not in the word written;
the guilt is that of the expositor, not of the text.
-- St. Hilary of Poiters
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Dec 10, '07, 4:33 am
john doran john doran is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2004
Posts: 1,601
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ribozyme View Post
Has anyone read the cosmologies of Alan Guth, Alexander Vilenkin, and Andrei Linde? Shows that multiverse can be created ad infinitum through inflation and God is no longer necessary in cosmology.
not true - vilenkin actually showed that chaotic inflationary cosmological models actually entail an ijitial singularity in the finite past, a fact which linde latere acknowledged. and if there's an initial singularity, then there's still a requirement to explain where it came from, and why it changed when it changed.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Dec 11, '07, 1:40 am
Cadellin Cadellin is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2005
Posts: 143
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is the Multiverse-Theory real or rubbish science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoliSciProf View Post
...the term "universe" must logically mean the totality of all things physically existing. I think this is correct. Therefore, multiple universes is a misnomer. There is still one totality of all things existing.
Quite right. If there were other universes what would be the collective name for all the univeses? The cosmos? One is then tempted to ask: what if there are other cosmoses; what would be the collective name for all the cosmoses? Creation? What if there are other creations... and so on. We need a word for all that exists and that word is universe, from uni meaning one.

As for the existence of multiple universes (as understood in the original question); their existence is postulated to account for certain phenomena in cosmology. In my opinion, they are just like the epicycles in the Greek theory of planetary motion. Epicycles were postulated to account for the retrograde motion of the planets. Sometime later somebody (Copernicus) came up with a theory that did away with the need for epicycles. Perhaps cosmology is at the same stage of development now that celectial mechanics was 500 years ago. Some day somebody might come up with a different way of looking at things which does away with the need for multiple universes. If multiple universes should be shown to exist then we're back to the beginning of this posting. In other words, the multiple universes would simply be other (even if fundumentally different) regions of the one universe.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Church elected both the anti and real Pope? bcullum Traditional Catholicism 5 May 9, '08 6:35 pm
Why is it that Protestants do not believe in the Real Presence?? It's in The Bible stefany379 Non-Catholic Religions 40 Dec 9, '07 4:06 pm
Science doesn't have all the answers John Higgins Apologetics 11 Jan 24, '05 8:08 pm
Good science is good religion. nordskoven Apologetics 3 Jul 8, '04 1:45 am



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8021Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: Roddy1234
4815CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: mountee
4283Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: Christine85
4027OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: fencersmother
3809SOLITUDE
Last by: Prairie Rose
3358Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
3182Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: 4elise
3144Poems and Reflections
Last by: PathWalker
2957For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: libralion
2677Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: Amiciel



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 6:09 am.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2013, Catholic Answers.