Creating universes

wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
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? 


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak

wavefreak wrote:

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?

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, we all create new universes before we have breakfast.  

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote: wavefreak

todangst wrote:
wavefreak wrote:

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?

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, we all create new universes before we have breakfast.

 

Too bizarre for my blood. I had forgotten about that little wrinkle.


doctoro
doctoro's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2006-12-15
User is offlineOffline
I think the inherent problem

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.


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote: According

todangst wrote:

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, we all create new universes before we have breakfast. 

 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


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod wrote: todangst

deludedgod wrote:

todangst wrote:

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, we all create new universes before we have breakfast.

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.

 

 

What you said.

 

Cool. We can create  universesTongue out

 

So then the question is, 600 years from now, will it be ethical to do so? 

 

 


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote:   So then

wavefreak wrote:
 

So then the question is, 600 years from now, will it be ethical to do so?

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


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod

deludedgod wrote:

wavefreak wrote:

So then the question is, 600 years from now, will it be ethical to do so?

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?

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? 


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak

wavefreak wrote:
deludedgod wrote:

todangst wrote:

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, we all create new universes before we have breakfast.

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.

 

 

What you said.

 

Cool. We can create  universesTongue out

 

So then the question is, 600 years from now, will it be ethical to do so? 

 

 

 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


phooney
phooney's picture
Posts: 385
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
stillmatic wrote:  Unless

stillmatic wrote:

 Unless our universe factory is powered by dead babies, I'm not sure how this would be unethical.

Oh.......

*starts the universe factory blueprints from scratch again*


rexlunae
rexlunae's picture
Posts: 378
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
phooney wrote: stillmatic

phooney wrote:
stillmatic wrote:

Unless our universe factory is powered by dead babies, I'm not sure how this would be unethical.

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.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
rexlunae wrote: phooney

rexlunae wrote:
phooney wrote:
stillmatic wrote:

Unless our universe factory is powered by dead babies, I'm not sure how this would be unethical.

Oh.......

*starts the universe factory blueprints from scratch again*

Well, if they're already dead...no reason not to put them to good use..........

 

SOYLENT UNIVERSE IS PEOPLE! It's made out of PEOPLE! Eye-wink

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.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
George Bush vetoed the

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.


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: George

wavefreak wrote:
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.

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


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Yellow_Number_Five

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
rexlunae wrote:
phooney wrote:
stillmatic wrote:

Unless our universe factory is powered by dead babies, I'm not sure how this would be unethical.

Oh.......

*starts the universe factory blueprints from scratch again*

Well, if they're already dead...no reason not to put them to good use..........

SOYLENT UNIVERSE IS PEOPLE! It's made out of PEOPLE! Eye-wink

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


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
stillmatic

stillmatic wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
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.

So he legislated something that was already the practice. It was my understanding that all stem cell research was done using abandoned frozen embryos.

You're expecting the Bush administration to be consistent?  


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1245
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Don't the mormons claim you

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.

πππ†
π†††