|
Navigation
The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us. Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple
|
Creating universes
Posted on: June 20, 2007 - 2:10pm
   Offline
Creating universes
Speculation ahead - warning.
So suppose humans bring the understanding of quantum mechanics to the point where we know how to manipulate the vacuum to initiate big bangs. Given our history of making new toys, I consider it likely that we would actually do this.
No?
|
|
Copyright Rational Response Squad 2006-2021.
|
According to the Copenhagen interpretation, we all create new universes before we have breakfast.
"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'
Too bizarre for my blood. I had forgotten about that little wrinkle.
My Artwork
I think the inherent problem with this is that you need an immense amount of matter for a big bang. I don't think there would be any way regardless of knowledge of quantum mechanincs to create a big bang without a crapload of initial matter and energy.
REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
That would be the Everett interpretation.
I think wavefreak is referring to something slightly different to quantum many worlds decoherence. In that interpretation, we have multiple carbon copies of the same universe, which are differered only by single quantum events, branch points in time in effect.
I am always careful to distinguish between Multiverse (a cosmology theory) and parallel universe (QM interpretation). Wavefreak is referring to the former.
In theory, wavefreak, it is possible to create a new universe. All it requires is an unbelieve compression of energy. To initiate the spontaneous breaking in vacuum, we would need to place two metal plates 10^-35 cm away from each other, or on the order of the Planck Length, the generate the casimir effect. This is beyond today's technology. Also, the energy levels required for this are only possible for utilization by a civilization which is Type II on the Kardavesh scale. Humans are predicted to reach this by about 2600.
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
What you said.
Cool. We can create universes
So then the question is, 600 years from now, will it be ethical to do so?
My Artwork
Ethical? I don't understand. According to Multiverse theory, our universe is one of a vast number of universes, which, like soap bubbles jostling each other, are bridged via wormholes and make up the multiverse.
I don't see why it would be "unethical". In science, ethics usually only meets biology and genetics, only rarely physics.
Also, according to the iron laws of thermodynamics, our universe is dying (winding down, cooling, running out of free energy). Eventually, we'll need a few home (in a few trillion years), so why not start today?
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
I suppose if we knew the consequences of our creative act then no problem. But would we have ethical obligations to any life that evolved in our new universe?
My Artwork
Unless our universe factory is powered by dead babies, I'm not sure how this would be unethical.
"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien
Oh.......
*starts the universe factory blueprints from scratch again*
Well, if they're already dead...no reason not to put them to good use..........
It's only the fairy tales they believe.
SOYLENT UNIVERSE IS PEOPLE! It's made out of PEOPLE!
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
George Bush vetoed the legislation that funded dead baby universe research. He restricted the research to only babies that are currently dead. No new dead babies will be allowed in federally funded programs.
My Artwork
So he legislated something that was already the practice. It was my understanding that all stem cell research was done using abandoned frozen embryos.
"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien
Hahahahahahaha!
"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien
You're expecting the Bush administration to be consistent?
My Artwork
Don't the mormons claim you become the god of your own universe after you die?
Guess joseph smith had it right all along.
There are no theists on operating tables.