Parallel Universe

K

KatYes

Two
MBTI
Infj
Hello INFJ community!

I am new here and this is my first thread, and I hope it's not the last one. First of all, I like to discuss philosophic questions, so spirituality and mysticism are the most interesting fields I like to research. I rather write than speak, because of my introverted personality, which gets complicated with overthinking, so I am really glad that there is community like this, so that we can all write and express ourselves, and especially connect with one another. As I mentioned before, I like to discuss philosophic questions, so below you have one, that fascinates me.

I wonder how many of you believe in parallel universe. I find it very interesting to think about possible universes in which we do exists in different forms. Everything about human beings and souls fascinates me. Is it possible that you go to parallel universe when dreaming, so that your dreams are reality in another universe? Is the parallel universe another reality like when you die and your soul leaves your body? I heard about stories of people who kind of got in parallel universe and it felt wrong for them. Is here anyone with that experience that would like to share it with us?

Sending positive energy,
Katyes 🙂
 
Welcome to the Forums. 😌

Cheers,
Ian
 
KatYes said:
I wonder how many of you believe in parallel universe.
Click to expand...
Greetings KayYes and welcome to the forum.

I guess my position on a parallel universe is one of open mind. Of course the meaning of parallel here needs to be thought out carefully, and of course the word universe also needs to be thought through. The idea of 'universe' on the face of it means everything there is - that would include other places in other dimensions too and would include those that are totally unconnected from our world. But usually these days, people take The Universe to be the connected space time that we live in.

So taking the second of these, I'd say that other universes are very likely to exist. That's because many of the ideas about how the universe came into being would automatically create many of them. Not just based on hard cosmological physics either - even religion says as much. For example 'in my father's house are many mansions' from Chr 14 of St John's Gospel.

But a parallel universe - that would imply that it's evolution is recognisably close to ours and maybe even separated from ours by a very narrow margin of whatever it is that separates universes. At first sight, this seems possible but unlikely unless the physics demands it, because our universe is so very finely tuned that another with only very slight initial differences would move a long way from ours before they both evolve very far.

There's more to this, though, but it's going to sound far fetched. So if we start with the question of why there is something rather than nothing, things get interesting:
  • One possibility is that there is nothing at all - that seems both logically and intuitively a very strong possibility. We know it's wrong, or I wouldn't be here writing this down - but even so it would not be surprising if it had been true, except that there would have been no-one around to not be surprised of course.
  • A second possibility is that something exists, but there is a lot of what could exist but doesn't. We take for granted that this is what reality is like, but logically and intuitively it seems highly implausible. There has to be some kind of selection made, and out of all the possible selections brought about by contingency (as is assumed by materialistically oriented physics) we have our particular world. Yet we know our world is highly tuned and is less likely to have come about by a one-off chance than if I won our state lottery every time I entered it. Of course we could always go back to the idea that God created it just as it is - but I suspect even God doesn't work quite like that.
  • A third possibility is that whatever is possible exists. This seems implausible, yet like the first option it is both logically and intuitively satisfying. It also seems consistent with the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and with the myriad worlds hypothesised in the string theory attempt to create a quantum theory of gravitation.
So if I had to pick one of these three, the third seems the most likely to me. i.e. Whatever is possible exists, and this would of necessity include a whole myriad of universes parallel to our own, as well as maybe infinitely more that are not parallel to us. It's also the one I fancy most, because the second one is pretty boring really, unless there is only one and it was created directly by Someone.
 
John K said:
Greetings KayYes and welcome to the forum.

I guess my position on a parallel universe is one of open mind. Of course the meaning of parallel here needs to be thought out carefully, and of course the word universe also needs to be thought through. The idea of 'universe' on the face of it means everything there is - that would include other places in other dimensions too and would include those that are totally unconnected from our world. But usually these days, people take The Universe to be the connected space time that we live in.

So taking the second of these, I'd say that other universes are very likely to exist. That's because many of the ideas about how the universe came into being would automatically create many of them. Not just based on hard cosmological physics either - even religion says as much. For example 'in my father's house are many mansions' from Chr 14 of St John's Gospel.

But a parallel universe - that would imply that it's evolution is recognisably close to ours and maybe even separated from ours by a very narrow margin of whatever it is that separates universes. At first sight, this seems possible but unlikely unless the physics demands it, because our universe is so very finely tuned that another with only very slight initial differences would move a long way from ours before they both evolve very far.

There's more to this, though, but it's going to sound far fetched. So if we start with the question of why there is something rather than nothing, things get interesting:
  • One possibility is that there is nothing at all - that seems both logically and intuitively a very strong possibility. We know it's wrong, or I wouldn't be here writing this down - but even so it would not be surprising if it had been true, except that there would have been no-one around to not be surprised of course.
  • A second possibility is that something exists, but there is a lot of what could exist but doesn't. We take for granted that this is what reality is like, but logically and intuitively it seems highly implausible. There has to be some kind of selection made, and out of all the possible selections brought about by contingency (as is assumed by materialistically oriented physics) we have our particular world. Yet we know our world is highly tuned and is less likely to have come about by a one-off chance than if I won our state lottery every time I entered it. Of course we could always go back to the idea that God created it just as it is - but I suspect even God doesn't work quite like that.
  • A third possibility is that whatever is possible exists. This seems implausible, yet like the first option it is both logically and intuitively satisfying. It also seems consistent with the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and with the myriad worlds hypothesised in the string theory attempt to create a quantum theory of gravitation.
So if I had to pick one of these three, the third seems the most likely to me. i.e. Whatever is possible exists, and this would of necessity include a whole myriad of universes parallel to our own, as well as maybe infinitely more that are not parallel to us. It's also the one I fancy most, because the second one is pretty boring really, unless there is only one and it was created directly by Someone.
Click to expand...

I'm leaning towards the third possibility because I do believe there is a quantum level gravity but you certainly won't get that from any scientist these days. This would require a miniature blackhole (dimensional perforations) at the center of ever atom and I've seen a theory that suggest this could theoretically be possible. The blackhole would be so tiny that we would not be able to see it and if we tried to measure it then it's likely that the proton and neutron would block the view of it in he same manner that the stars block the view of a blackhole at the center of a galaxy. This would create a unified theory that would scale top to bottom.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that time does not exist in our three dimensional space and that time is merely a measure of movement within space (clock moves, earth moves, sun moves, which is how we measure time). This movement through infinite space gives the illusion of time. Similarly, in the fourth dimension space does not exist and the movement (for lack of a better word) through time is infinite (yes, this is hard to comprehend). These connection between space and time dimensions occur in these blackholes that scale (atom, planet, star, galaxy, universe), with electromagnetic and gravitational forces emerging at every level. The reason that it works is because there is a higher energy state in one dimension (time) than the other (space). It's also why we see so much energy released with nuclear fusion.

Finally, we have to account for consciousness and that is starting to become more clear as the ORCH OR theory created by Penrose and Hameroff is rapidly gaining more traction. This theory suggest that the brain gains its consciousness from quantum connections in microtubules located within neurons. I've been blogging about the ORCH OR theory in this forum and there is experimentation and studies that are making this theory a very real possibility. What I'm suggesting is that the brain is bridging the connection between the time and space dimensions and provides us with the appearance or illusion of both time and space existing as space-time. This starts to become more logically a possibility when we look at experiments like the double slit which collapses the wave function through observation and Schrodingers cat involving super positions.

Regardless, I do not believe we will ever be able to scientifically measure anything within the time dimension; however, we can make assumptions about what that would look like based on observable effects within the space dimension - something scientists have been attempting to do at CERN.

All of that said, I can't necessarily agree with string theory because it just seems too convenient and because there are far too many of these theories that have been presented.
 
Last edited:
TomasM said:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that time does not exist in our three dimensional space and that time is merely a measure of movement within space (clock moves, earth moves, sun moves, which is how we measure time). This movement through infinite space gives the illusion of time.
Click to expand...
It’s interesting that some physicists are conjecturing that time and space are secondary and emerge from something more fundamental.

I think our human perspective is distorted by other aspects as well. From the outside our universe is surely a static thing that integrates the full extent of both time and space and all they contain into a single integrated entity. From that perspective we are each of us eternal - each point of our existence exists eternally within the universe, perceived from a perspective outside of it. From that perspective as well there are no separate objects because all are joined together at the roots of the world. Mind you that assumes it has a single root - recent observations may be casting doubt on that.
 
John K said:
It’s interesting that some physicists are conjecturing that time and space are secondary and emerge from something more fundamental.
Click to expand...
I have considered that there might be a connecting point (or origin) between the two (time and space). If only we could go inside a blackhole. At the end of the day, I'm a Christian and I leave it in God's hands, yet my human experience loves puzzles so I can't seem to put them down some of the "time." LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top