[Guest]

Have you considered the fact that there can be an infinite amount of universes, and all are different, even if there are only one atom apart?

[Izzy]

Yep, it's called the multi-verse, and was, at one point, my favorite interpretation of quantum mechanics. Unfortunately, I've had several physicists tell me it isn't possible, so *shrugs*. I can't remember their actual reasoning at the moment, nor do I have the time to look it up, but I'm sure you can research it yourself.

Unless of course you just mean other universes and not parallel ones? Then yeah, that's likely. I high doubt they're going to be 'one atom' apart, because spontaneous change in one atom's whereabouts it's enough to create an entire new universe. New universes are likely to form through black holes, called 'daughter universes'.

Inappropriate language edited: Martini

[hugemonkey]

Have you considered the fact that there can be an infinite amount of universes, and all are different, even if there are only one atom apart?

Although huge, I wouldn't say infinite.

Imagine every particle of the universe in every possible position. Incredibly huge number but still finite.

Now imagine every vector possible for each particle huge again but not infinite.

continue doing this with each variable and multiply.

You would get an incredibly huge number but it would not be infinite.

The reason why the positions of the particles and the vectors of the particles is not infinite is because of the "grain" of space, the Planck length. This gives the universe a sort of grid between which coordinates there is nothing.

[Guest]

Ahh yes, Multi-verse, I do remember that one. Gotta love QM!

But combining both Izzy and HM posts, it would still be finite. Even if every single atomic event were to split, it would still be finite. Infinity is an often misused and misunderstood concept, IMHO.

I didn't think the universe theories were really disprovable without the use of another unproven theory. You can disprove all sorts of einstein's and Hawking's theories, but only with the use of more unproven ideas. Its all just theoretical, but interesting all the same.

Schrodinger almost ruined my senior year in college.... bastard

[Guest]

You would get an incredibly huge number but it would not be infinite.

The reason why the positions of the particles and the vectors of the particles is not infinite is because of the "grain" of space, the Planck length. This gives the universe a sort of grid between which coordinates there is nothing.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that grain not just from an observer's point of view, a limit on measurability? It raises the question of whether 2 universe states can be said to be different if the difference isn't measurable. That immeasurable difference might still affect the probability of future events, might it not? (I don't know the answer to that, I'm just wondering)

[Izzy]

I think the universe has the potential to expand infinitely, but is definitely, at all times, completely finite. But just because it has this potential (much like I have to potential to count to <insert ridiculously high number here that would take centuries to count to>), it would never work in practice, so there's not point in calling the universe infinite.

Or at least I don't think it would work? Can the universe actually be here forever? Doesn't sound right to me.

[hugemonkey]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that grain not just from an observer's point of view, a limit on measurability? It raises the question of whether 2 universe states can be said to be different if the difference isn't measurable. That immeasurable difference might still affect the probability of future events, might it not? (I don't know the answer to that, I'm just wondering)

Palmerc7 mentions Schrodinger. I think that that is the point of QM if the difference is not or cannot be observed then it is not a difference at all.

[Guest]

Palmerc7 mentions Schrodinger. I think that that is the point of QM if the difference is not or cannot be observed then it is not a difference at all.

Yet neither is it a "sameness". Octopuppy's question implies that any one universe could (potentially) split into an infinity of paths based on random QM behaviors (such as vacuum fluctuations). Whether infinity is reality or an unattainable ideal is one of those deepest philosophical questions to which both answers are both true and false (i.e. a paradox). Long live paradoxes!

[Guest]

Palmerc7 mentions Schrodinger. I think that that is the point of QM if the difference is not or cannot be observed then it is not a difference at all.

Schrodinger's principle does get extrapolated beyond its intended reasoning (see "osmosis", no that does not mean that hanging around someone smart will make you smarter)

But yea, the equation itself is on uncertainty, the more you know about one thing, the less you know about the other. Technically, the more accurately you know the speed, the less certain you can be about the location. Particle dynamics stuff...

[/memory lane]