"The Multiverse Falsified" and fake physics.

[franklinstower]

TBF this is intellectually dishonest nonsense. Nobody in this thread has really been talking about how airtight the multiverse theory is, in fact quite the opposite. People have pretty much uniformly stated that for the time being it's just a theory they are trying to fit into current models that seems like it fits the best. This is all that the theoretical models regarding the big questions currently are because proving shit like how the universe came to be or the nature of space/time is a fucking massively difficult exercise, it's not like we won't need masses of evidence to make firm conclusions. If you understood anything about the bridge between theoretical and practical science you'd understand that.

Also your pompous attitude is tiresome. I always find in these online debates there's always that one guy who seems to think he is Wittgenstein reborn and that he is rolling his eyes throughout the discussion as he understands everything being talked about at such a deep level that the very existence of the debate in his vicinity bores him. Don't be that guy.

Also another thing I'll add, your over familiarity with the rebuttals of your stance doesn't mean they aren't valid. If you have something to counter them with go ahead, rolling your eyes just because you've heard them before is asinine. You couldn't rebuke them the first time and you won't be able to rebuke them regardless of how many times you hear them.

As someone who has been eagerly following this discussing here and elsewhere I feel that calling the multiverse notion a theory is disingenuous. It it not a theory, it's an idea-- a hypothesis. Theories make accurate predictions.

Calling it a theory lends a level of credibility to the hypothesis that it does not deserve. This point has been made and agreed upon by some quantum physicists. Certain philosophers have also criticized the use of the word theory on this subject as it seems more akin to waxing philosophical .

 

[robotsonic]

As someone who has been eagerly following this discussing here and elsewhere I feel that calling the multiverse notion a theory is disingenuous. It it not a theory, it's an idea-- a hypothesis. Theories make accurate predictions.

Calling it a theory lends a level of credibility to the hypothesis that it does not deserve. This point has been made and agreed upon by some quantum physicists. Certain philosophers have also criticized the use of the word theory on this subject as it seems more akin to waxing philosophical .

That's fair, I'm not a scientist so may err with the semantics at times. It should also be noted that there are many different multiverse hypotheses, I don't think the guys arguing against it in this thread know exactly what the distinctions are and which one they're arguing against, presumably all??? It should be obvious by the fact that there are multiple competing sub hypotheses that the science on this is far from decided even among people who are onside with it, the fact that people in this thread are claiming otherwise shows you how much attention they're actually paying.

 

[Bob Gray]

The multiverse has always been an unproven theoretical solution to explain flaws in string theory. It's more likely that string theory is wrong to begin with and we need to go back to the drawing board, we just don't know enough yet. Nobody has been saying that it's something you can take to the bank, including those that lean towards the theory being true. It's retarded to debunk conjecture, it's not something that needs to be debunked, it's a working theory.

Yeah, this. Its one of the biggest "I sound smart at parties" sound bites people can spit out to sound like an intellectual to hot chicks. The actual scientific evidence for the multiverse is laughable.

To be fair, the scientific community knows this. Its the fake "science aficionados" that talk about it like its anything other than a neat idea.

 

[franklinstower]

That's fair, I'm not a scientist so may err with the semantics at times. It should also be noted that there are many different multiverse hypotheses, I don't think the guys arguing against it in this thread know exactly what the distinctions are and which one they're arguing against, presumably all??? It should be obvious by the fact that there are multiple competing sub hypotheses that the science on this is far from decided even among people who are onside with it, the fact that people in this thread are claiming otherwise shows you how much attention they're actually paying.

And I am not trying to beat up on you either. I just know that certain quantum physicists have come under fire for presenting the hypothesis as if it's a theory to the general public. I certainly got that impression as a casual layperson.

And sometimes multiverse is brought up as a counter to the fine tuning of the universe arguments but this is deeply disengenuouse because a hypothesis is not an argument against the credible math of fine tuning.

Also the TS is one of the more intelligent posters on this forum so don't mistake him for a troll or rreligou nut. It's not the case.

 

[That209]

Lol any tool that utilizes weight is manipulating gravity. Planes are manipulating gravity.

Planes don’t manipulate gravity. Planes use a thrust to push. They’re basically contained explosions that push you. Gravity doesn’t work that way whatsoever. Gravity is something we’ve yet to learn how to actually use. We don’t have a single machine on this planet (at least that people like us know of) that can create its own gravity/manipulate gravity. It’s like the holy grail of technology if we can do this. It would mean soundless flight. It would mean flight that’s thousands of times quicker than the fastest plane. If we could use gravity like this, according to Einstein, we’d be able to bend time to our will (time travel). Look it up. We don’t have any fucking clue how to use gravity. Again, if we did, if we had a machine that can manipulate gravity, it’d be the biggest breakthrough ever. It would change everything. The world today would be very different. You guys literally tried already and it didn’t work. We don’t know how to do it and if we did it’d be some seriously top secret shit. You could rulenthe world if you knew how to manipulate gravity such as make a vehicle that uses gravity for flight. I guess I should just say anti gravity.