A Conversation for Proving The Existence of Parallel Universes (with the Added Bonus of Immortality)

Not quite proof

Post 1


The experiment described can never give 'proof' of the multiple-unvierses theory, just as quantum mechanics can never give 'proof' on anything, because it relies on overwhelming probability. While surviving the experiment over an overwhelming 99.9% chance of dying certainly may be called grounds for belief in said theory, what of that other 0.1%? Even to yourself, you can never truly prove the differences between multiple universes and gross luck.

The same principle of multipe universes could be applied to evolution: Our observation of ourselves, intelligent beings, against the overwhelming odds of our development is the same proof. After all, in some universe, humans had to evolve, didn't they? I believe this is called the anthropic principle, although it does not traditionally refer to multiple universes.

Of course, saying quantum mechanics may never prove something rather presumes that other sciences may. But as we all know, bistromathics prescribes that numbers themselves do not behave predictably, and are relative to the observers movement in restaurant. So perhaps this 'proof' is as good as the next!

Any way about it, it is a fascinating, stimulating, and altogether useless concept.

Not quite proof

Post 2

Baryonic Being - save GuideML out of a word-processor: A7720562

You are right. We can't really prove anything undeniably.

Not quite proof

Post 3


The theory is balderdash. If the universe splits and your friends in one universe see you die but your friends in the other universe see you live, then the theory is both proved and disproved. And what of your friends? Are they convinced or not? In one universe they are, in the other not. How many splits are going on every second? All that this theory does is removes all decision in the world (everything is always right). It is a new spin on the paradoxes of Zeno.

And what on earth is the distinction between real and false randomness? Randomness is only relative. The fall of the balls in the lotto is entirely determined by physics, but it is random enough for the purpose. There is no better randomness than that.

Key: Complain about this post

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more