Well anyway, its been several years since I have studied philosophy. Though I enjoy it very much, I don’t have many people I can talk to about this kind of stuff without them turning off haha.
Now please don’t flame me if this is in the wrong section, Its a bit of a mix of theoretical physics and philosophy.
I don’t claim to know much about quantum physics, but I was reading about “Schrödinger’s Cat” and continued to read “Hugh Everetts” Theory of many worlds, Which basicaly says “whenever a measurement takes place, the entire universe divides as many times as there are possible outcomes of the measurement” So for every chance of something happening it will happen in an infinate amount of worlds.
My first thinking on this is that, anything has a percent chance of happening so though be it very remote for a pig to fly it may be possible in one out of an infinite amount of universes.
I then thought a little deeper and realised that an infinity devided by any amount (except an infinity) creates another infinity. (half infinity and you have 2 infinities). So every chance has an infinate percentage to happen. So everything that can happen does happen. Ok, we live in an infinity, where an infinate things take place every second. With this in mind I both have a 100% chance to live forever, and a 100% chance to die. Which makes me both dead and alive. And because everything is possible I have a 100% chance of living forever in this reality. There is also a 100% chance that nothing really exsists.
Right now, in an infinity anything is possible, So in atleast one reality God will exsist, and in one reality he will not, and in all realities he will both 100% exsist, and 100% won’t exsist. So in effect everywhere and no where.
Ok, now i need some serious criticism please haha! I’ve tried explaining this the best I can feel free to ask if you are unsure about anything I have said.
This is interesting… but let me point a few things out.
This theory is sort of like solipsism - which states that I only know my mind… and thus everyone I see or talk to, don’t have minds… it’s just me. It’s a mute point to argue because no one’s listening anyways.
The same goes for this theory, in a way at least. Our minds (insofar as I know) don’t have access to the other universes… it’s not like we can look at all of our choices and see where they’ll go, and then make an actual decision about the decision.
See what I’m getting at? Quantum may point us in the multiverse theory… but for us, it doesn’t really matter cause we cannot know what goes on in the other universes.
So… you could be right, but you’ll never be sure, at least till you die, so you just as easily be wrong. Really you could describe Religion by that last sentance as well… but that’s a whole 'nother can of worms.
I see what your getting at, and yeh it makes sense.
However I think I may of not explained this properly, what I am trying to get at is that anything is possible within this reality without creating others, even though with an infinate probablity other universes to exsist. So within our own reality anything is possible and impossible all together. Things may change each second, for example this post may have never been writtin and in 1 second it will have never been created and no one would know any differance, with this in mind we will never die, and yet constantly die. life through infinate deaths, sounds bit morbid I know.
First off, I thought it was a very well expressed argument into which you have clearly placed a lot of thought. Moreover, it is certainly a interesting idea.
However, the one problem that strikes me is your quasi-assumption that we do in fact live in an infinity. Philosopher’s and indeed Theologians have for long differed on the subject of whether or not space if infinite.
This is very interesting. What was said before, how some are trying to see if the universe is infinte or not, could end up helping prove this thought of infinte reallities. I may be way off, but, if it is found that the universe is a infinte size, couldn’t that back up this theroy of having infinte reallities?
I could be way off, and telling me if i am missing anything :-?
I don’t see problem in different reallities, existing in the infinite universe. When the universe is infinite, it can collect everything, even small worlds/reallities. Also, I’ll try to include dimensions - I find them kind of structure, based on certain combination of time and space. Different times on different space forms the dimension. That’s how I’m trying to explain it that way. So if there are different dimensions with different spaces in them, why can’t they exist in our universe?
Your theory is based on everything dividing, and every event happening, and many dimensions. This idea does not allow us to be individuals, which gives me a problem. It also needs there to be a Mark 1 universe. A universe that leads the way.
For example… If two universes have split, then two more, you have four. This obviously escelates very rapidly being as billions of events happen on Earth every second. But what about identical splits? Some of these universes must split identically. Which one is doing the splitting? All of them? So you get identical splits. Because of these identical splits you end up with an identical you. Is it really OK to use so much energy to create an identical universe? The only way to control this situation is to have a Mark 1 universe that does the splitting.
I agree with your point that, taking into account that our world has some probabilistic events, any of these events may take place (even those that have that near-zero probability), making our world THE ONE where these events take place (-: But every person (every “self”) stays in one specific world, and i perceive it as impossible for them to ever have knowledge about “alternative” worlds, except in their imagination. I mean, we are doomed to remain in the world where that specific probabilistic event HAS or HAS NOT taken place, we can’t access the world where it happened otherwise. I have a feeling that this can be logically proven.
Now, talking about one specific world that we experience. My perception is that in the world, only such events may take place, that can be described by laws of the world. For example, if we know that we cannot walk through walls, our world cannot “split” into, say, two worlds, in one of which we will be able to do it. Our world can only “split” into a world where we, for example, fall from stairs, and a world where we don’t, because both events are possible according to the laws of the world that is “splitting”.
But! There may be laws that we are not aware of. I dubbed these unknown laws “scientific nagual” (know Castaneda’s nagual? - a domain where we have no knowledge at all). So there is no way we can judge what CAN and what CAN NOT happen in the next moment. Not until we have knowledge of all the laws in the world.
Such explanation takes us back to probabilities. Talking about the possibility of being immortal, we can only say that, to our extent of knowledge, it is quite improbable. The probability of some supreme being granting you immortality CANNOT BE ESTIMATED AT ALL. Nagual. Doesn’t make sense.
That’s my perception. Thank you for provoking these thoughts.
And yet, someone died today. One thing about philosophy that I believe is, we don't get to make up the world we are in, we are stuck explaining the one we have. Does your model account for the situation we in fact find ourselves in- a world in which it seems as though certain things definitely did and do happen, and other things don't?
Also, even granting that we live in an infinite space (something I happen not to believe), why equate that in any way with infinite possibility? Sure, an infinite number of things happen in this infinite space of ours, but only a particular set of them happen [i]to you[/i]. It still remains a fact that even in infinite space, if you survived a harrowing car accident, you didn't [i]also[/i] die in that same car accident. The only way you could equate physical space and probabalistic 'space' would be to say that if you travelled far enough, you would reach a world identical to earth, with people identical to us, up until a certain point where something different happens there than it did here. A classic 'possible world' in the real world, in other words. Even if there were such a world as that, there would be two problems:
There would be no reason to claim that other person living a life like yours to be you, anymore than claiming that a pair of matching bookends are two instantiations of the same bookend.
That “Earth 1 and Earth 2 had all the same events up until time T” would become a fact of it’s own, a fact that could have happened otherwise, so you’d still end up with uninstantiated possibilities.
so anyone catch a black hole on there tellescope last night?
man there annoying like the guardians of destiny and timecube lol
you can only find them at the last second
This book owes its existence to Harriet Wolff, a German Journalist I met in Berlin a few years ago. Before putting her questions to me Harriet wanted to recount a little fable. For her, this fable encapsulated my position as a writer.
I am in a telephone box, after the end of the world. I can make as many telephone calls as I like, there is no limit. I have no idea if anyone else has survived, or ig my calls are just the monologues of a lunatic. Sometimes the call is brief, as if someone has hung up on me; sometimes it goes on for a while, as if someone is listening with guilty curiosity. There is neither day or night; the situation is without end.
If any measurement can be divided infinitly, then, in a sense, I lived for an infinite amount of time yesterday, yet today still came. Time seems to be bound by the rules created by the reality in which it exists (in are case these are the rules of three dimensions, everything has a begining and end.) We are three dimensional beings with a three dimensional existance, so it is completely irrelevant if time and the universe are infinite. For the same reason, the possibility of an infinite amount of realities with inifinite possibilities can have no predictable or even knowable effect on us because we have know real understanding of the nature of infinity.
timecube guy…what the hell are you talking about? there are two possibilites in my mind. one, either your philosophy is so ridiculiously complex that society would label you as delusional, or, and this one is the one i personally subscribe to since you dont illustrate any logical process as to how you manage to come to these wantonly stated absolutes…youre just being a dumbass because youre an add afflicted little child who lashes out at logic and reason because it represents some universal authority that you feel oppressed or threatened by. in any event youve managed to shut newdimension up by outstaging him with stupidity, and youve even managed to do so without nd’s characteristic cliches such as zombies, xombies, pirates, ninjas, cyborgs, robots, cannibals and any combination of the above. and to that effect, i applaud you. i cant believe youre only one year younger than me.
