Multiverse Theory Debunked. No Multiple Worlds Can Exist At The Same Time.

[MarathonMike]

We can just barely get off the planet Earth and think we know all there is to know. We know squat. We go back and forth whether coffee is good for you for heaven's sake and yet we think we can determine with certainty whether the multiverse exists or not. Give me a break.

I was going to post but you stated it perfectly. Well said.

 

[Wuwei]

People who like quantum mechanics should get a kick out of this.

We have an experiment now that shows that multiverses cannot exist. The many worlds theory that a majority of scientists believe today is just illusion. It only exists when the quantum particles are measure (observed) and consciousness does not have to be present.

To put it in terms of the Shrodinger's Cat thought experiment, we cannot have the cat existing in two states at the same time or superposition. It is either alive or dead when we observe it.

How this was shown was in 2011 when two scientists. Shan Yu and Danko Nikolic of the Max Planck Institute, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, in their paper Annalen der Physik, showed that consciousness was not necessary and only measurement. It means through measurement that the reality of one state or another exists. For example, with Shrodinger's cat, it can either be dead or alive, but can't be both at the same time. That is just illusion even though we can map the illusion with light particles. As per the double slit experiment, the reality exists when it is measured. What we see is just the potential probablilities when things are not measured (observed).





What does it mean in practical terms? For one, you can't go backward in time. The majority of atheist scientists who believed and still believe in multiverses are wrong. I don't know what other silly things they believed, so I'll stop here .

With that, there is still one more experiment to deal with the future MAYBE affecting the past.

The three videos you posted are more to show the gee-wizz aspects of QM. I prefer John Cramer's "Transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics" (TIQM.) It takes the mystery out of entanglement. His original 1986 paper is republished at https://www.researchgate.net/public...sactional_interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics. TIQM is untestable simply because it agrees with relativistic QM which has already been tested. It is an interpretation, not a theory.

The model focuses on the interaction between a wave going forward in time with a wave going backward in time.

If this sounds outlandish think of this: A particle going very fast will see space flattened because of the Lorentz contraction. As a particle approaches the speed of light the depth of the target will flatten toward zero.

In a photon's frame of reference the depth of the intervening universe is exactly zero so a photon does not see space nor time. It is absorbed the instant it is emitted in it's frame of reference. Photon entanglement is local in that sense. Certainly spooky action at a distance is what Einstein's frame of reference would see, but the photon sees immediate temporal action and no distance.

Admittedly the math of a frame of reference traveling at the speed of light is not defined in physics, but it does give a new intuitive slant to some of the quantum weirdness.
.

 

[james bond]

People who like quantum mechanics should get a kick out of this.

We have an experiment now that shows that multiverses cannot exist. The many worlds theory that a majority of scientists believe today is just illusion. It only exists when the quantum particles are measure (observed) and consciousness does not have to be present.

To put it in terms of the Shrodinger's Cat thought experiment, we cannot have the cat existing in two states at the same time or superposition. It is either alive or dead when we observe it.

How this was shown was in 2011 when two scientists. Shan Yu and Danko Nikolic of the Max Planck Institute, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, in their paper Annalen der Physik, showed that consciousness was not necessary and only measurement. It means through measurement that the reality of one state or another exists. For example, with Shrodinger's cat, it can either be dead or alive, but can't be both at the same time. That is just illusion even though we can map the illusion with light particles. As per the double slit experiment, the reality exists when it is measured. What we see is just the potential probablilities when things are not measured (observed).





What does it mean in practical terms? For one, you can't go backward in time. The majority of atheist scientists who believed and still believe in multiverses are wrong. I don't know what other silly things they believed, so I'll stop here .

With that, there is still one more experiment to deal with the future MAYBE affecting the past.

The three videos you posted are more to show the gee-wizz aspects of QM. I prefer John Cramer's "Transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics" (TIQM.) It takes the mystery out of entanglement. His original 1986 paper is republished at https://www.researchgate.net/public...sactional_interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics. TIQM is untestable simply because it agrees with relativistic QM which has already been tested. It is an interpretation, not a theory.

The model focuses on the interaction between a wave going forward in time with a wave going backward in time.

If this sounds outlandish think of this: A particle going very fast will see space flattened because of the Lorentz contraction. As a particle approaches the speed of light the depth of the target will flatten toward zero.

In a photon's frame of reference the depth of the intervening universe is exactly zero so a photon does not see space nor time. It is absorbed the instant it is emitted in it's frame of reference. Photon entanglement is local in that sense. Certainly spooky action at a distance is what Einstein's frame of reference would see, but the photon sees immediate temporal action and no distance.

Admittedly the math of a frame of reference traveling at the speed of light is not defined in physics, but it does give a new intuitive slant to some of the quantum weirdness.
.

Is your paper from 1986? Mine are newer findings.

 

[james bond]

We can just barely get off the planet Earth and think we know all there is to know. We know squat. We go back and forth whether coffee is good for you for heaven's sake and yet we think we can determine with certainty whether the multiverse exists or not. Give me a break.

No evidence now for a multiverse. What do you have beside your opinion?

 

[james bond]

Haha. Even Stephen Hawking before his death admitted he wasn't a fan of the multiverse.

"With a science paper published after his death, Stephen Hawking has revived debate on a deeply divisive question for cosmologists: Is our Universe just one of many in an infinite, ever-expanding "multiverse"?

According to one school of thought, the cosmos started expanding exponentially after the Big Bang.

In most parts, this expansion or "inflation" continues eternally, except for a few pockets where it stops.

These pockets are where universes like ours are formed—multitudes of them that are often likened to "bubbles" in an ever-expanding ocean dubbed the multiverse.

Many scientists don't like the idea, including Hawking, who said in an interview last year: "I have never been a fan of the multiverse."

If we do live in an ever-inflating multiverse, it would mean the laws of physics and chemistry can differ from one universe to another, a concept that scientists struggle to accept."

Yet, he scaled down his hypothesis of the multiverse and now it's dead like atheist Hawking.

After death, Hawking cuts 'multiverse' theory down to size

With a science paper published after his death, Stephen Hawking has revived debate on a deeply divisive question for cosmologists: Is our Universe just one of many in an infinite, ever-expanding "multiverse"?

phys.org

 

[Carl in Michigan]

No Multiple Worlds Can Exist At The Same Time.

Show me where the Bible says that...…..

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God, then it isn't in the Bible but Kalam Cosmological Argument which states:

The atheists used to argue that we cannot know statement 3 because there exists multiverses. This paper shows that the multiple states cannot exist at the same time. That is perception or the waves. What can exist is that which can be measured (observed; consciousness does not have to be present). Thus, Kalam Cosmological Argument holds true.

To you, it means that you are wrong again. Will you ever chalk it up to experience and actually learn some real science?

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God

You made a scientific claim, so where is it in the Bible?

Who told you the Bible is a science text book? It doesnt cover everything. That is not its purpose

It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No Multiple Worlds Can Exist At The Same Time.

Show me where the Bible says that...…..

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God, then it isn't in the Bible but Kalam Cosmological Argument which states:

The atheists used to argue that we cannot know statement 3 because there exists multiverses. This paper shows that the multiple states cannot exist at the same time. That is perception or the waves. What can exist is that which can be measured (observed; consciousness does not have to be present). Thus, Kalam Cosmological Argument holds true.

To you, it means that you are wrong again. Will you ever chalk it up to experience and actually learn some real science?

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God

You made a scientific claim, so where is it in the Bible?

Who told you the Bible is a science text book? It doesnt cover everything. That is not its purpose

It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out

Who told you the Bible is a science text book?

The OP. He once said that scientists couldn't explain planetary orbits, but the Bible could.
He still won't tell me the verse that proved his claim.

Maybe he was lying?

 

[luchitociencia]

Good to know that vindication of science has started the first steps.

After the loony of Einstein with his relativity fantasies, the branch of science became invaded by lots of imaginations invented by scientists in a competition to see whom was the greater deluded between them.

They invented ideas like seeing the universe as it was in its past, the big bang theory starting from a microscopic particle in the middle of nothing, black holes as a product of formulas written in a piece of paper with the finest abstract mathematics of those years, an atom in two places at the same time, and several more.

The websites full of those fantasies with articles, videos, computer simulations... but not a single sure evidence but circumstantial and incomplete data.

I asked for a review (audit style) of all those good for nothing theories since long ago, and I see finally some work has been put in progress to eliminate those sci fiction theories out from science.

 

[Wuwei]

Is your paper from 1986? Mine are newer findings.

The topics in the videos you cited are around the same vintage as John Cramer. The Transactional Interpretation is a current topic started decades ago. Cramer published a layman book 2016.

 

[Hollie]

People who like quantum mechanics should get a kick out of this.

We have an experiment now that shows that multiverses cannot exist. The many worlds theory that a majority of scientists believe today is just illusion. It only exists when the quantum particles are measure (observed) and consciousness does not have to be present.

To put it in terms of the Shrodinger's Cat thought experiment, we cannot have the cat existing in two states at the same time or superposition. It is either alive or dead when we observe it.

How this was shown was in 2011 when two scientists. Shan Yu and Danko Nikolic of the Max Planck Institute, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, in their paper Annalen der Physik, showed that consciousness was not necessary and only measurement. It means through measurement that the reality of one state or another exists. For example, with Shrodinger's cat, it can either be dead or alive, but can't be both at the same time. That is just illusion even though we can map the illusion with light particles. As per the double slit experiment, the reality exists when it is measured. What we see is just the potential probablilities when things are not measured (observed).





What does it mean in practical terms? For one, you can't go backward in time. The majority of atheist scientists who believed and still believe in multiverses are wrong. I don't know what other silly things they believed, so I'll stop here .

With that, there is still one more experiment to deal with the future MAYBE affecting the past.

The three videos you posted are more to show the gee-wizz aspects of QM. I prefer John Cramer's "Transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics" (TIQM.) It takes the mystery out of entanglement. His original 1986 paper is republished at https://www.researchgate.net/public...sactional_interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics. TIQM is untestable simply because it agrees with relativistic QM which has already been tested. It is an interpretation, not a theory.

The model focuses on the interaction between a wave going forward in time with a wave going backward in time.

If this sounds outlandish think of this: A particle going very fast will see space flattened because of the Lorentz contraction. As a particle approaches the speed of light the depth of the target will flatten toward zero.

In a photon's frame of reference the depth of the intervening universe is exactly zero so a photon does not see space nor time. It is absorbed the instant it is emitted in it's frame of reference. Photon entanglement is local in that sense. Certainly spooky action at a distance is what Einstein's frame of reference would see, but the photon sees immediate temporal action and no distance.

Admittedly the math of a frame of reference traveling at the speed of light is not defined in physics, but it does give a new intuitive slant to some of the quantum weirdness.
.

Is your paper from 1986? Mine are newer findings.

Let’s be honest. “Your” findings are from the various bibles as a literal description of a 6,000 year old planet.

 

[james bond]

No Multiple Worlds Can Exist At The Same Time.

Show me where the Bible says that...…..

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God, then it isn't in the Bible but Kalam Cosmological Argument which states:

The atheists used to argue that we cannot know statement 3 because there exists multiverses. This paper shows that the multiple states cannot exist at the same time. That is perception or the waves. What can exist is that which can be measured (observed; consciousness does not have to be present). Thus, Kalam Cosmological Argument holds true.

To you, it means that you are wrong again. Will you ever chalk it up to experience and actually learn some real science?

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God

You made a scientific claim, so where is it in the Bible?

Who told you the Bible is a science text book? It doesnt cover everything. That is not its purpose

It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out

Haha. I told Toddsterpatriot that the Bible is NOT a science book, but science backs up the Bible.

He asks the most dumbest questions all the time, but doesn't learn anything. He needs to answer other people's and my questions to even leave go.

 

[james bond]

Is your paper from 1986? Mine are newer findings.

The topics in the videos you cited are around the same vintage as John Cramer. The Transactional Interpretation is a current topic started decades ago. Cramer published a layman book 2016.

The vids has been updated since 2019. Many worlds started from that guy in the video, Hugh Everett III, in 1957. People thought it was a crackpot idea until Shrodinger's cat thought experiment. However, it's been shown wrong as the collapse occurs with measurement (scientific observation). No consciousness is required. We don't know what is going on, but the light particles do not exist as a wave in this world. It exists as a particle that went through one of the slits just like the macro objects. You, yourself, do not believe in FTL travel, but something is going on with the spooky action at a distance. We know there is no superposition in this universe. I can watch these videos, put it together, figure it out, and explain it. I don't think atheist scientists believe in multiverses anymore. More believe in string theory and multiple dimensions like Brian Greene. You need to keep up with this stuff.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No Multiple Worlds Can Exist At The Same Time.

Show me where the Bible says that...…..

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God, then it isn't in the Bible but Kalam Cosmological Argument which states:

The atheists used to argue that we cannot know statement 3 because there exists multiverses. This paper shows that the multiple states cannot exist at the same time. That is perception or the waves. What can exist is that which can be measured (observed; consciousness does not have to be present). Thus, Kalam Cosmological Argument holds true.

To you, it means that you are wrong again. Will you ever chalk it up to experience and actually learn some real science?

If you want to know how this deals with atheist science and God

You made a scientific claim, so where is it in the Bible?

Who told you the Bible is a science text book? It doesnt cover everything. That is not its purpose

It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out

Haha. I told Toddsterpatriot that the Bible is NOT a science book, but science backs up the Bible.

He asks the most dumbest questions all the time, but doesn't learn anything. He needs to answer other people's and my questions to even leave go.

but science backs up the Bible.

What part of science backs up your Biblical claim about planetary orbits?

He asks the most dumbest questions all the time,

What kind of questions should I ask to get more details about your dumb claims?

 

[james bond]

What part of science backs up your Biblical claim about planetary orbits?

Don't you know? You should know how our planetary orbits are. That's taught in elementary school. I even gave you the link to look it up so you can discover for yourself.

What kind of questions should I ask to get more details about your dumb claims?

I don't make dumb claims. I'm not like the atheists here who are usually wrong. You can start by stop asking dumb questions. Maybe you could think for yourself and come up with a coherent statement using the website I gave you. Then, we and others may be able to have a conversation with you instead of wtf, this idiot has popped up again?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What part of science backs up your Biblical claim about planetary orbits?

Don't you know? You should know how our planetary orbits are. That's taught in elementary school. I even gave you the link to look it up so you can discover for yourself.

What kind of questions should I ask to get more details about your dumb claims?

I don't make dumb claims. I'm not like the atheists here who are usually wrong. You can start by stop asking dumb questions. Maybe you could think for yourself and come up with a coherent statement using the website I gave you. Then, we and others may be able to have a conversation with you instead of wtf, this idiot has popped up again?

Don't you know?

No, I don't know what part of the Bible proves your claim about planetary orbits.
And you won't post it so I have to assume you were lying.

I don't make dumb claims.

You claimed scientists can't explain planetary orbits. That's a dumb claim.
You said the Bible can explain planetary orbits. That's an even dumber claim.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What part of science backs up your Biblical claim about planetary orbits?

Don't you know? You should know how our planetary orbits are. That's taught in elementary school. I even gave you the link to look it up so you can discover for yourself.

What kind of questions should I ask to get more details about your dumb claims?

I don't make dumb claims. I'm not like the atheists here who are usually wrong. You can start by stop asking dumb questions. Maybe you could think for yourself and come up with a coherent statement using the website I gave you. Then, we and others may be able to have a conversation with you instead of wtf, this idiot has popped up again?

I don't make dumb claims.

Tell me again about the solar wind. Wow, that was a doozy!!!

 

[Crepitus]

People who like quantum mechanics should get a kick out of this.

We have an experiment now that shows that multiverses cannot exist. The many worlds theory that a majority of scientists believe today is just illusion. It only exists when the quantum particles are measure (observed) and consciousness does not have to be present.

To put it in terms of the Shrodinger's Cat thought experiment, we cannot have the cat existing in two states at the same time or superposition. It is either alive or dead when we observe it.

How this was shown was in 2011 when two scientists. Shan Yu and Danko Nikolic of the Max Planck Institute, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, in their paper Annalen der Physik, showed that consciousness was not necessary and only measurement. It means through measurement that the reality of one state or another exists. For example, with Shrodinger's cat, it can either be dead or alive, but can't be both at the same time. That is just illusion even though we can map the illusion with light particles. As per the double slit experiment, the reality exists when it is measured. What we see is just the potential probablilities when things are not measured (observed).





What does it mean in practical terms? For one, you can't go backward in time. The majority of atheist scientists who believed and still believe in multiverses are wrong. I don't know what other silly things they believed, so I'll stop here .

With that, there is still one more experiment to deal with the future MAYBE affecting the past.

Arvin Ash search only turns up Arvin Ash's website. Searching for Arvin Ash's education only turns up Arvin Ash's website. Searching for Arvin Ash's background only turns up Arvin Ash's website.

The only one who's ever heard of Arvin Ash is Arvin Ash.

That's kinda wierd, don't you think?

 

[james bond]

Don't you know?

No, I don't know what part of the Bible proves your claim about planetary orbits.
And you won't post it so I have to assume you were lying.

I don't make dumb claims.

You claimed scientists can't explain planetary orbits. That's a dumb claim.
You said the Bible can explain planetary orbits. That's an even dumber claim.

As usual you remain big dumb or stupid af . Why don't you know? I gave you the website to look up your questions.

I am intelligent and have degrees. You have no degree that I know of and just ask dumb questions. Why do you ask dumb questions?

Please answer the above questions.

 

[james bond]

Arvin Ash search only turns up Arvin Ash's website. Searching for Arvin Ash's education only turns up Arvin Ash's website. Searching for Arvin Ash's background only turns up Arvin Ash's website.

The only one who's ever heard of Arvin Ash is Arvin Ash.

That's kinda wierd, don't you think?

No. Here's Arvin Ash's credentials.

"Arvin’s Bio

At the risk of coming across as an erudite, my educational background is rather eclectic, as I hope my videos are. I have 3 degrees. A Bachelors in Chemical Engineering, a Masters In Mechanical engineering, and an MBA. In addition, I have 2 years of medical school. I taught intermediate physics, advanced physics, and robotics as a grad student in college. Yes, I was in school forever, and wish I stayed longer."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Don't you know?

No, I don't know what part of the Bible proves your claim about planetary orbits.
And you won't post it so I have to assume you were lying.

I don't make dumb claims.

You claimed scientists can't explain planetary orbits. That's a dumb claim.
You said the Bible can explain planetary orbits. That's an even dumber claim.

As usual you remain big dumb or stupid af . Why don't you know? I gave you the website to look up your questions.

I am intelligent and have degrees. You have no degree that I know of and just ask dumb questions. Why do you ask dumb questions?

Please answer the above questions.

I gave you the website to look up your questions.

I don't need a website. I don't need to look up any questions.
I only need your proof that the Bible explains planetary orbits. Post the verse.

I am intelligent and have degrees.

Don't forget liar. You're also a liar.