WRA
WrathfulDwarf
THE LOOSE CANNON
So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Would that mean that there are incalculable versions of yourselves in other universes?
Could there be other WDs posting the same question in the other KMCs?
Are we not the result of Evolution?
Isn't a Omniverse consider a multiple universes existing at once?
Well?
SC
Symmetric Chaos
Fractal King
Re: So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Would that mean that there are incalculable versions of yourselves in other universes?Could there be other WDs posting the same question in the other KMCs?
Are we not the result of Evolution?
Isn't a Omniverse consider a multiple universes existing at once?
Well?
Interestingly if you consider to possible number of variations that could exist there are pobably an infinite number of absolutely identical versions of us doing the exact same things.
DEB
Re: So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Would that mean that there are incalculable versions of yourselves in other universes?Could there be other WDs posting the same question in the other KMCs?
Are we not the result of Evolution?
Isn't a Omniverse consider a multiple universes existing at once?
Well?
You been reading a book haven't you?? 🙄
I read a book like that too........It relates to holographic universes. Kind of a Quantum thingie...
AA
Admiral Akbar
Senior Member
Re: So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Would that mean that there are incalculable versions of yourselves in other universes?Could there be other WDs posting the same question in the other KMCs?
Are we not the result of Evolution?
Isn't a Omniverse consider a multiple universes existing at once?
Well?
I would be interested in meeting "myself." I wonder just how different "I" would be, or maybe the same.
REG
Re: So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Would that mean that there are incalculable versions of yourselves in other universes?Could there be other WDs posting the same question in the other KMCs?
Are we not the result of Evolution?
Isn't a Omniverse consider a multiple universes existing at once?
Well?
In the other KMCs, the WDs used the word "ourselves" instead of "yourselves" thus separating into another universe at the point that the choice of words was made. 😱 jk
I believe that such is possible, I also believe there is absolutely no means by which these universes could become aware of one another as if they were to come into contact, at the point of contact they would merge and the past would be whole and indiscernible by the merged self.
Or is it all just reflections of Amber?
Sorry couldn't help throwing a Zelazny reference into this discussion 😉
All choices and alternatives are chosen. Each choice is played out in an entirely separate universe, resulting in an infinite number of alternate universes. No choice is not made, they all have resulted in something somewhere, and influenced the path that that universe took.
MIN
Re: So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Would that mean that there are incalculable versions of yourselves in other universes?
Could there be other WDs posting the same question in the other KMCs?
Are we not the result of Evolution?
Isn't a Omniverse consider a multiple universes existing at once?
Well?
Some cosmologists who propose multiple universes, see this as the logical response to Intelligent Design. In other words, whereas ID points out how finely tuned all the countless parts of our universe are in order to support life -- and that the odds of this happening by chance are so infinitesimal that this must be the result of a creator -- these cosmologists say it's simply a numbers game: if you have an infinite number of universes, sooner or later you will get one that's just like ours. Indeed, with true infinity, you can have an infinite subset of life-supporting universes -- each with a slight variation, many with a WrathfulDwarf going "H'mmm...I wonder if there are other universes..."
And while there is no empirical evidence for multiple universes -- just like there is no empirical evidence for "God" -- empirical evidence for these other universes is theoretical attainable, whereas for "God" (a nonempirical entity, if "He" exists) it is not.
WRA
WrathfulDwarf
THE LOOSE CANNON
Re: Re: So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Originally posted by Mindship
Some cosmologists who propose multiple universes, see this as the logical response to Intelligent Design. In other words, whereas ID points out how finely tuned all the countless parts of our universe are in order to support life -- and that the odds of this happening by chance are so infinitesimal that this must be the result of a creator -- these cosmologists say it's simply a numbers game: if you have an infinite number of universes, sooner or later you will get one that's just like ours. Indeed, with true infinity, you can have an infinite subset of life-supporting universes -- each with a slight variation, many with a WrathfulDwarf going "H'mmm...I wonder if there are other universes..."
I like this part and this is were I like to stick to. I know eventually ID will pop out and I'm trying to steer clear of that area. I do find ID interesting....but I'm more into the Probability area.
ATL
Atlantis001
The one without a name
Re: Re: So, if we are a part of a Omniverse and we follow Evolutionary system.
Originally posted by Mindship
And while there is no empirical evidence for multiple universes -- just like there is no empirical evidence for "God" -- empirical evidence for these other universes is theoretical attainable, whereas for "God" (a nonempirical entity, if "He" exists) it is not.
Good point.
Its funny how the scientific society accept some non-empirical ideas like virtual particles, string theory and parallel universes, but deny other ideas when everything that is not empirical should not be considered science by their own definition of science.