Alternative Timelines

[neo-fusion]

I am not sure if it is widely accepted or not, and I will say that I have not really looked into this, but after seeing it on different channels, I am just curious of the possibillity.

Some scientists believe that alternate dimensions are possible and as an example, in a different dimension right now, there is possibly a dinosaur walking through your kitchen.

Hard to believe, but anything is possible (Bush got elected twice in a row... lol).

Anyway, basically a different way of saying this is that these alternate dimensions are actually alternate timelines.

So what do you guys think of the entire theory?

[Acacia Sgt]

Well, I'm not sure if to believe the whole other dimensions thing, but yes, if it were true they would be an alternate time line in the perspective of our own.

Though I believe this conclusion has long been reached before now.

[Lord J Esq]

I'll be the wet sponge here and point out that any such idea is pure speculation. There is no evidence to indicate the existence of alternate timelines. I am not aware of any testable theories which propose the idea, either...although I will be the first to admit that my knowledge of contemporary theory in...whatever branch of science would cover this...is pretty low. However, I will also be the first to admit that, if my knowledge here is low, then all y'all's (except maybe Uboa's?) is probably considerably lower. So, let's not conflate the wild speculations of science fiction with actual high-end modern science. I don't think any of us is qualified to do that.

That said...if there were alternate timelines with which we could possibly have any interaction, the thing to think about would be how those interactions might occur, rather than what the alternate timelines might entail. Unfortunately, I suspect that would be pretty stiff stuff for many folks. I think the emotional motivation here is the topic creator's excitement at the possibility that there might be whole other timelines out there. That excitement more appropriately belongs in the realm of fiction, because in the scientific method such speculation and imagination would have to wait until we had something to look at. Concepts such as "timeline" and "out there" cannot be concocted out of thin air; they can only come from observation or theoretical prediction. As far as I know, we haven't got any of either.

From the viewpoint of advancing scientific knowledge, I suggest that it would be more fruitful if we were to focus on understanding the many known question marks in our universe right now. Perhaps some of them will lead to fanciful places.

[GenesisOne]

Yes, like the presence of Dark Matter and finding the material that gives mass to objects.

[Lord J Esq]

I call it "ice cream."

[Boo the Gentleman Caller]

If the concept of a multiverse is real, then there is surely a universe (and an unlimited number of variations) in which the Chronoverse is reality... Crazy to think, yeah?

[Sajainta]

If the concept of a multiverse is real, then there is surely a universe (and an unlimited number of variations) in which the Chronoverse is reality... Crazy to think, yeah?

http://www.chronocompendium.com/Forums/index.php/topic,4407.0.html

[IrishReaper]

I seriously hope the multiverse idea is true. Infinite variations on each and every event ever to happen in history, from the big bang to the eventual heat death of the universe. It can offer some comfort in depressing situations. "Sure, she turned me down in this universe, but in another one, me and her are out talking, having a good time." "So my father in this universe is dead from my actions. In another universe, we reconciled and are happy." "Sure that car crash paralyzed me here, but in another universe, i can walk and run. Or, the crash killed me. Either way, an AU me is not suffering." "Aerith may have died in this Universe's version of FF7, but in another universe's version, she survives till the end because Cloud does some awesome sword manuever to save her and all". While the multiverse theory has no proof for it, it also has no evidence against it. Anything is possible (Come on Cheney, go back to whatever circle of hell from which you came).

[GenesisOne]

Unfortunately, multiverse  theories lack empirical testability, and without hard physical evidence are basically unfalsifiable.  It's outside the methodology of scientific investigation to confirm or disprove.

Even if it weren't, what would happen if we found out that there were multiverses where different realities take place?  There are moral implications to there being a multiverse.

How would you define truth?  What may be true to you in one universe can easily be false in an Alternate Universe.  How would you define morality? You could very well be a puppy kicker, a drug addict, or anything you find to be morally reprehensible in an AU.  How would you define society and humanity in general?  A cannibalistic tribe would make more sense than the most organized, upright metropolis in an AU.

Finally, there's Occam's Razor.  Which is more likely: an infinite number of universes with an infinite set of physical laws, or a single universe with a single set of physical laws?

[IrishReaper]

They are both just as likely, though the single universe theory seems simpler, therefore proving it by Occam's Razor. However, due to new work on string theory, as well as the big bang machine in Europe starting up again, we may soon have proof of a multiverse. Or we could create a point of supergravity, known as a blackhole, here on Earth and suck us all into hell.

[Lord J Esq]

They are both just as likely, though the single universe theory seems simpler, therefore proving it by Occam's Razor. However, due to new work on string theory, as well as the big bang machine in Europe starting up again, we may soon have proof of a multiverse. Or we could create a point of supergravity, known as a blackhole, here on Earth and suck us all into hell.

There are three sentences in your post. I don't suppose you would like to provide an argument in support of any one of them, detailing your logic as you go and making citations as needed?

[GenesisOne]

Mr. Reaper, the Hadron Collider which you're referring to is actually for the purpose of discovering the particle that gives mass to all matter (aka the "God Particle"), also for studying the conditions of the universe at the time of the Big Bang, not for discovering an AU.

That last bit about creating a miniature Black Hole is bunk.  Black holes are created through unfathomable amounts of gravity generated by collapsing stars, not by particles colliding into each other.

No machine on Earth (or any machine, for that matter) can simulate the gravity generated by collapsing stars.

[TriforceofEternity]

They are both just as likely, though the single universe theory seems simpler, therefore proving it by Occam's Razor. However, due to new work on string theory, as well as the big bang machine in Europe starting up again, we may soon have proof of a multiverse. Or we could create a point of supergravity, known as a blackhole, here on Earth and suck us all into hell.

I agree with you Irish Reaper about multi-universes as I have looked somoe stuff up even though I am not that advance in mathmatics.

Remember sometimes the simpilest speech is the best speech where the biggest speech can be the foolish speech making one seem smart when they are not.     

    Don't listen to the hidden trolls on here trying to clevery criticise your freedom of speech and I am not naming any names to protect privacy.

[GenesisOne]

ToE, The Hadron Collider doesn't have the capabilities of creating a micro black hole (MBH) that would "suck us all into hell."

At least read this.  Even if it did, such MBHs would decay and dissipate instantly due to Hawking Radiation. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_of_particle_collisions_at_the_Large_Hadron_Collider#Micro_black_holes

Also, read the section below that on Rossler's and Plaga's arguments over MBH's.  Their arguments are flawed and inconsistent.  We have nothing worry about from any MBHs being generated in the Collider.

[Boo the Gentleman Caller]

I've been reading Michael Crichton's Timeline recently, and it proposes a very unique look at both time travel and the multiverse theory.  A quick search on Wikipedia actually explains the mechanics in a fairly simple and straightforward manner:

In Timeline, Crichton uses the plot device of the theory of many universes, or a "multiverse," to create the scientific basis by which time travel is possible. Crichton sets up the constraints of the multiverse theory in a very specific way that allows his characters to engage in time travel.

One of the main characteristics of Crichton's multiverse is that time moves at different speeds in the different universes of the multiverse. The implication of this is that while the year is 1999 in the main, "present" universe of the story, time has moved more quickly or more slowly in other universes, and the year may not be 1999 in those other universes. For example, in the universe that the main characters jump to in the novel, time has moved more slowly than the universe which they came from (where the year is 1999), so that the year in the jumped-to universe is only 1357.

Another of the main characteristics of Crichton's multiverse is that events in one universe have effects on the other universes, so that any given universe can never be isolated from the events of another universe. Thus, changes in the events in one universe will cause the other universes to experience the exact same changes - albeit, not at the "present" time in those other universes, but at the time of the original change in the originating universe. That is to say, if a change happens in the year 1357 in one universe, the corresponding change that happens in a universe that is presently at the year 1999 will also have occurred in the year 1357.

In essence, what all this means is that while characters do not technically engage in time travel in the traditional sense (e.g., they do not travel to another point in time within their same universe), in reality, if characters travel to a universe that exists in the past relative to their originating universe, any changes that they effect in that jumped-to universe will be reflected in their originating universe (as well as all other universes of the multiverse).

For example, when Professor Johnston traveled to the 1357 universe, he left a message along with his eye glasses in that universe, which were then discovered by his dig team. This occurred because the change he made in the 1357 universe became manifest in all the other universes of the multiverse.

Another theme of the novel is much the same as "Jurassic Park" as Doniger is attempting to sell trips to the past. However, Doniger is jarred when scans of the past show the truth of history: George Washington is seen at the Crossing of the Delaware to be huddled under a blanket, not standing firm. Also, watching the Gettysburg Address, Doniger is jarred that Abraham Lincoln's voice is a high pitched squeak. He demands they be changed for investors and when a technician protests that this is what happened, Doniger snaps that he's not selling the truth, he's "selling history."

That's what I love about Crichton - he makes his fictional science, well, believable.