Scientists acting like Priests

[Zero Liability]

Right, which would make it an hypothesis.

when those people calling it religious-like faith almost certainly couldn't even explain what a universe actually *is*.

Indeed, invoking mystical entities that just raise more questions than they resolve.

Proven in that certain theories can be explained if multi verses exist

I am not an expert but I have seen text books with the proof but the actual calculations were a touch beyond me


:$

It does lend credence to the whole simulation theory of the universe, if true... but that is a big if.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Proven in that certain theories can be explained if multi verses exist

I am not an expert but I have seen text books with the proof but the actual calculations were a touch beyond me


:$

I.e all proofs contain assumptions. It's impossible to prove anything with 100% certainty (unless it's plain logic - like 2+2=4).

It's like dark matter - there are observed things happening in the universe, and a theoretical 'dark matter' solves a whole bunch of them. Therefore dark matter 'makes sense'.

It seems odd to describe the idea of a multiverse as 'faith', when those people calling it religious-like faith almost certainly couldn't even explain what a universe actually *is*.

[SpontaneousOrder]

How is this a matter of faith? He's suggesting that the idea makes sense based on what we do know (the exact opposite of faith) - or at least what he thinks that we do know.

And 'makes sense' doesn't mean definitely true.


The idea that time passes at different 'rates' depending on your altitude (from earths centre of gravity) would have sounded just as unintuitive a little ever 100 years ago - yet now you casually make use of that knowledge every time you use your sat-nav.

[original PM]

How do you mean "proven"? What sort of assumptions come into play? I'm not hostile to the idea, I am just at a loss as to how this sort of thing is proven.

Proven in that certain theories can be explained if multi verses exist

I am not an expert but I have seen text books with the proof but the actual calculations were a touch beyond me


:$

[SueEllen]

Before I even clicked the link to this, I knew it was that Brian 'Creepy Smile' Cox. He simply doesn't explain theories properly and waffles on using buzzwords. I remember science documentaries like say Horizon being far more informative but this guy is the spokesperson for the mass dumbing down of the U.K. scientific education.

You can't blame him solely for Horizon being dumbed down. Michael Mosley has also helped a lot........

[Zero Liability]

How do you mean "proven"? What sort of assumptions come into play? I'm not hostile to the idea, I am just at a loss as to how this sort of thing is proven.

[original PM]

Many world's theory can be proven with some theoretical maths.

But I think cox used to be quite watchable he does now seem to pontificate a bit these days.

[Zero Liability]

Might as well just begin teaching all those science fiction books in classrooms then, and remove the "fiction" bit. Or who knows, keep it and take out the science bit.

[OwlHoot]

BBC News - Brian Cox: 'Multiverse' makes sense

I do hate it when Scientists cross over to the religious side.

I accept that Mr Cox has a right to believe in multiverse. And that he may be right - I am open minded.

But to say it "makes sense". Who can back that up?

Its a matter of faith.

It does make (formal) sense because it is ultimately based on simple statistics, as compelling as the statistics behind thermodynamics which nobody in their right minds would dispute.

It also leads to the same predictions as the conventional Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics but without the latter's arbitrary assumptions, in particular the mysterious collapse of the wave function.

Also, Brian Cox isn't the only physicist who leans toward the Many Worlds theory these days. Among others, Sean Carroll is also a convert - 2014-06-30 Why the Many-Worlds Formulation of Quantum Mechanics Is Probably Correct

A good summary of the theory can be found here. Everett himself called his theory the Relative State formulation of QM. It was someone called Bryce de Witt, an enthusiastic supporter, who later called it the Many Worlds theory.

Despite its apparently insane extravagence and its implications for free will, both of which repel many physicists and laypeople alike, it does make sense in a way that reality is ultimately a multiverse where everything that can happen does.

[BrilloPad]

Before I even clicked the link to this, I knew it was that Brian 'Creepy Smile' Cox. He simply doesn't explain theories properly and waffles on using buzzwords. I remember science documentaries like say Horizon being far more informative but this guy is the spokesperson for the mass dumbing down of the U.K. scientific education.

Everyone on TV has to be photogenic. Never mind about the content. Same with Presidents and Prime Ministers.

But, still, he has a PHD.

[sbakoola]

Before I even clicked the link to this, I knew it was that Brian 'Creepy Smile' Cox. He simply doesn't explain theories properly and waffles on using buzzwords. I remember science documentaries like say Horizon being far more informative but this guy is the spokesperson for the mass dumbing down of the U.K. scientific education.

[BrilloPad]

BBC News - Brian Cox: 'Multiverse' makes sense

I do hate it when Scientists cross over to the religious side.

I accept that Mr Cox has a right to believe in multiverse. And that he may be right - I am open minded.

But to say it "makes sense". Who can back that up?

Its a matter of faith.