Sci-Fi Fantasy Book Club discussion

127 views
Mutliple Universe Theory

Comments (showing 1-22 of 22) (22 new)    post a comment »
dateDown_arrow    newest »

John Rhodes (John_D_Rhodes) | 4 comments .. does the group agree with multiple universe theories and if so which real/imagined theory do you you like the best?

I'm thinking I like the one related to Quantum Mechanics (I'm not admiting to understanding all the competing parts of the theory but it is fascinating) which means there an infinate number of me and some may actually have sold some stories!

Anyway panel, over to you?


message 2: by Kevin (last edited Sep 01, 2011 08:05AM) (new)

Kevin Milligan | 54 comments "Anyone who thinks they understand quantum mechanics, does not understand quantum mechanics." Richard Feynman wisely worded it in this manner. I love the concept of the very small and the 'simplicity' of the very large but my favorite theory will remain to be string theory. Michio Kaku explains things in such a way that I could read his books repeatedly...if I had time to do such things. If there are an infinite number of all of us then my goal will be to make sure this one does succeed in writing something.


M.G. Wells (goodreadscomMGWells) Anything is possible. I'm sure they do exist. After all, we reside in a VAST universe :0)

Enjoy the Journey,

M.G. Wells

Light Masters: Number 13


Amos Fairchild (AmosTFairchild) | 4 comments I use multiple universe theory sometimes. Other times not. Thinking about using it in a 'Vampire Planet' novel I have on the back-burner. lol. (yes, the vampires are the good guys, dammit) I mean, as a scifi tool it's great if it's done well.


Marc (Nirgal) | 2 comments I don't have an opinion on the validity of the multiple universe theory but I do have a problem when people, even reputable scientists, invoke the theory in an attempt to explain why our universe has the particular physical constants that we find characterizing it.


Jessica Healy (Majessticon) | 7 comments In know very little about quantum physics; some day I will definitely get around to doing some reading in that field (when I'm finished college, I imagine) But I'm not sure, based on what (teensy tiny) bits of info I have about the universe in general that I could get behind it...

BUT, even if it were true, I'm not sure I'd feel any connection with my counterparts. Like, if AlternaJess had finally written that damn novel I think I'd be jealous rather than proud. Unless she let me plagiarise it...

But I would definitely view it as plagiarism, ie, pilfering from another person... because... I live in this universe. Alternate universes are fun to think about, but... existentially meaningless, maybe?


Marc (Nirgal) | 2 comments Jessica wrote: "In know very little about quantum physics; some day I will definitely get around to doing some reading in that field (when I'm finished college, I imagine) But I'm not sure, based on what (teensy t..."

You might be interested in reading this book.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/81...


Kodai Okuda | 8 comments John wrote: ".. does the group agree with multiple universe theories and if so which real/imagined theory do you you like the best?

I'm thinking I like the one related to Quantum Mechanics (I'm not admiting ..."


I find the multiverse theory to be very fascinating.
It makes for interesting SF in my opinion.
This show explains it well for anyone interested. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7SDrj...


message 9: by Steven (last edited Oct 28, 2011 09:50AM) (new)

Steven Jordan (StevenLyleJordan) | 7 comments The idea that reality is made up of "branes," multiple parallel constructs that each project a 3-dimensional universe, all existing in the same space but separated by vibrational frequencies, intrigues me; the idea that by changing a frequency we might be able to move from one brane to the other is a fascinating one, something I may explore in a future book.

On the other hand, I cannot believe that one such universe would be similar to another, i.e., "parallel realities" where my doppelganger married a supermodel in one, has super-powers in another, etc. In fact, any parallels at all would be too much to expect; there would be no Earth, no Solar system, no stars in the same relative positions to ours; each universe would be as different as snowflakes.

Quantum theories suggest that there are a finite and fixed number of branes. They may even collide over time, allowing particles to "leak" from a brane in a higher state to one in a lower state... this may have caused the Big Bang.

So: Multiverse, okay; multi MEs, no way.


Kevin Milligan | 54 comments Everything I read on the subject forces me to agree with Steven so yes a concept that the phyical constants in our universe would be different in others seems to hold truth.


Darren Humphries (Darrenhf) | 9 comments Steven wrote: "The idea that reality is made up of "branes," multiple parallel constructs that each project a 3-dimensional universe, all existing in the same space but separated by vibrational frequencies, intri..."


Oh my head hurts.


Chris | 19 comments I don't recall if he had any/much "theory" behind it, but I like the way Michael Moorcock used multiple universes. It was cool when they intersected at times allowing for characters of different worlds to meet.


message 13: by S. (new)

S. Schweitzer (salanschweitzeryahoocom) | 4 comments I haven't done much in terms of marketing my novels, but I do have several online sources prepared by both publishers and oter market experts; plus I have available my website. My name is S. Alan Schweitzer and have written 4 novels to date and am now in the process of writing a fifth one. Two previous novels deal with the theme of parallel worlds plus additional sci fi orders. Anyone familiar? Thanks.

http://zone2world.com/


message 14: by nurseven (last edited Apr 03, 2012 04:16AM) (new)

nurseven kavaklı | 1 comments most of the times especially when i am disappointed, i really hope that it is true. the thought that in a parallel world everything is different from what i am experiencing now makes me feel better :)
i get what i want at least in one way or another :)


Paul Vincent (Astronomicon) | 15 comments I quite like the theory that our own universe is nowhere near as large as it appears. There's some interesting evidence that the vast scope is actually a side-effect of gravitational lensing and we are just seeing a hall-of-mirrors effect on an astronomical scale.

I have no idea how valid the theory is, but I like the idea of things not actually being how they appear. It would be nice to have a plot twist on the scale of the universe.

An interesting side effect of the multiple universe concepts is that infinite universes would lead to a huge number of universes which are either identical to our universe or so close as to make no difference. If it were possible to jump to other parallel universes, we might find many of them are indistinguishable from our own.


message 16: by H.S. (last edited Apr 03, 2012 10:32AM) (new)

H.S. St.Ours (HS_StOurs) | 2 comments So it all boils down to time, in my opinion.

If time is infinite, everything has to happen sooner or later. Everything. No matter how absurd is seems. Like, sooner or later I'd have to be a talking fish writing this post in ancient Mayan hieroglyphs on a computer made out of sheep's butter. That kind of absurd. It'd HAVE to happen, sooner or later, if time were infinite.

But if time is not what we think it is, if time is, let's say, simply a relationship between quantum particles and just appears to us as infinite but is just really, really long, then the scenario of multiple universes where we are only slightly different seems unlikely.

m.02


Clyde (wishamc) H.S. wrote: "So it all boils down to time, in my opinion.

If time is infinite, everything has to happen sooner or later. Everything. No matter how absurd is seems. Like, sooner or later I'd have to be a talki..."


Umm ... You are sort of forgetting about the second law of thermodynamics, aren't you? Even if you allow seeming physical impossibilities (like butter computers), it really isn't true that everything is possible. Even if time is infinite, energy is not.


Ryan Schock | 2 comments I've reciently started doing some reading on quantum mechanics, string theory and m-theory, and i thought an amazing book that really openedit all up to me was a book by Brian Greene "The Elegant Universe." The idea of a multiverse seems extremely compelling except for one concept. The idea proposes that an entire universe can a does spring up into existance hence "The Big Bang" but an idea has come up that this concept of a beginning is not necessary. A universe can expand and contract without any adverse effects on the laws that govern said universe due to the fact that a string, a fundamental, or so stated fundamental constituent of the universe, is NOT a point particle. So stated if this universe had no beginning then why would any other universe 'pop' into existense. Also, it seems to me, that with all other possiblities being conceived in the other ten spacial demisions and one time why would another universe become necessary.
Entirely the opinion of the noob string theory student. Interested on opinions.


Kevin Milligan | 54 comments I have always wanted to reed "The Elegant Universe" but the one that I strongly suggest is Michio Kaku's "Hyperspace." Either way did Brian Greene get into brane theory. Basically it is you described. A universe without a beginning. In this concept two universes exist next to each other and as they slide apart, a force we know as dark energy, they drift to a point where everything should halt. Now I do not know what force would create the opposite push but they would then move back towards each other. As they fluctuate between inevitable collisions the cycle continually repeats. These collisions create new universes and new big bangs. Living in one, one would never know of these events transpiring. Visually I always have liked this theory but as I said before this unknown force would need to be explained.


Kathy | 2 comments I have read "The Elegant Universe". Also, "Godel, Escher, Bach". Note I said *read* not necessarily *understood*. Working on a hypothesis, but my favorite of all time is from Heinlein. "fictons" Just simply love it.


Sarah Nguyen | 2 comments Okay, so I'm pretty up to date on all the theories, the arguments for and against, and the popular fiction that incorporates multi-universe-theory, but I have to say I just don't feel in my bones like it's a truth. Every time I make a decision, I spawn another universe where my doppelganger does the opposite? All the truths in physics thus far have all been so elegant and succinct - E=MC2, not E=everything that could ever, has ever, or will ever happen. Don't get me wrong, I love reading about it and it makes my brain bleed sometimes (in a good way), but in the end I guess I'm just a simple single-universe kind of girl.


Steven Jordan (StevenLyleJordan) | 7 comments Sarah wrote: "All the truths in physics thus far have all been so elegant and succinct - E=MC2, not E=everything that could ever, has ever, or will ever happen."

Right. Infinite parallel universes break the laws of thermodynamics. And it creates a paradox: If there are infinite universes, somewhere there's a universe where someone or something does something so powerful/stupid/incredible that it wipes out every universe... so none of us would be here now.


back to top

unread topics | mark unread


Books mentioned in this topic

LightMasters: Number 13 (other topics)

Authors mentioned in this topic

M.G. Wells (other topics)