Oxford Scientists "Discover" Parallel Universes.

[Craiglowery]

http://tech.uk.msn.com/news/article.asp ... id=6212162

 

 

 

 

 

Parallel universes really do exist, according to a mathematical discovery by Oxford scientists described by one expert as "one of the most important developments in the history of science".

 

 

 

The parallel universe theory, first proposed in 1950 by the US physicist Hugh Everett, helps explain mysteries of quantum mechanics that have baffled scientists for decades, it is claimed.

 

 

 

In Everett's "many worlds" universe, every time a new physical possibility is explored, the universe splits. Given a number of possible alternative outcomes, each one is played out - in its own universe.

 

 

 

A motorist who has a near miss, for instance, might feel relieved at his lucky escape. But in a parallel universe, another version of the same driver will have been killed. Yet another universe will see the motorist recover after treatment in hospital. The number of alternative scenarios is endless.

 

 

 

It is a bizarre idea which has been dismissed as fanciful by many experts. But the new research from Oxford shows that it offers a mathematical answer to quantum conundrums that cannot be dismissed lightly - and suggests that Dr Everett, who was a Phd student at Princeton University when he came up with the theory, was on the right track.

 

 

 

Commenting in New Scientist magazine, Dr Andy Albrecht, a physicist at the University of California at Davis, said: "This work will go down as one of the most important developments in the history of science."

 

 

 

According to quantum mechanics, nothing at the subatomic scale can really be said to exist until it is observed. Until then, particles occupy nebulous "superposition" states, in which they can have simultaneous "up" and "down" spins, or appear to be in different places at the same time.

 

 

 

Observation appears to "nail down" a particular state of reality, in the same way as a spinning coin can only be said to be in a "heads" or "tails" state once it is caught.

 

 

 

According to quantum mechanics, unobserved particles are described by "wave functions" representing a set of multiple "probable" states. When an observer makes a measurement, the particle then settles down into one of these multiple options.

 

 

 

The Oxford team, led by Dr David Deutsch, showed mathematically that the bush-like branching structure created by the universe splitting into parallel versions of itself can explain the probabilistic nature of quantum outcomes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This could be the biggest find in history. This could change our perspective on the world drastically.

 

 

 

Your thoughts?

[Nom]

What is with you and the news threads?

 

 

 

Anyway, that article is old. I discovered parallel universes ages ago.

[pfilc23]

I love it when scientists prove something on a minute scale and apply in a more global sense. Just becuase some subatomic particle reacts in a certain way doesn't mean there's whole alternate universes. It's kinda like when they said they discovered teleportation (oh yeah, it's only with photons...not real objects with mass). I'm not saying discoveries like this can't lead to actual useful discoveries, but to say this proves it is inaccurate. Then again, these guys are a hell of a lot smarter than me, so who am I to criticize, eh?

[Bubsa]

And in another universe, we'd have something interesting to post about.

[Kwisatz]

Personally I believe in an infinite amount of linear universes.

 

 

 

That is, once our current universe collapses, another will form. Statistically speaking, it could be the exact same as ours save for precisely one minor difference, no matter how minute the difference is. And once that universe collapses another could appear with any n number of differences, n being an impossibly high number that we could definitely think of as infinity. And so this cycle repeats an infinite number of times with new universes being formed that may or may not be the same as one that came before it.

 

 

 

In this manner if we gain the ability to jump forward in time we could jump to any "alternate" universe, and then jump forward again to a universe that is precisely the same as the one we are currently in, since statistically speaking there is bound to be one, although it would be a mind-bogglingly large amount of time later than the one we are in now.

 

 

 

Dunno if I explained that clearly or not.

[Zonorhc]

Well, seeing as how quantum mechanics can't really be disproven, you can always apply the same reasoning as religions do to believe this.

[Diesel]

And in another universe, we'd have something interesting to post about.

 

 

 

+1 OT has been kinda boring in the past couple of days. Thought it would get a little more exciting because of Halo 3 and whatnot...

 

 

 

Anyways, back on-topic, The idea that I have multiple "universe clones" of myself in alternate universes doesn't really appeal to me at all.

 

 

 

Also, Oxford people are too darn smart. Why can't they jusy let the universe be and let us live our lives without questioning our existence as atoms and molecules or what ever the heck we are. What possible use could come out of this in the next decade. I doubt that we are going to develop some multi-universal travel system or anything to that degree.

 

Just an observation I made...

[meol]

I had heard of this theory a long time ago, and the news you posted only show that theory. I actually thought that a scientist had proven this theory somehow, proving the existence of at least one parallel universe.

 

But I see you disappointed me. :P

 

 

 

Personally I believe in an infinite amount of linear universes.

 

 

 

That is, once our current universe collapses, another will form. Statistically speaking, it could be the exact same as ours save for precisely one minor difference, no matter how minute the difference is. And once that universe collapses another could appear with any n number of differences, n being an impossibly high number that we could definitely think of as infinity. And so this cycle repeats an infinite number of times with new universes being formed that may or may not be the same as one that came before it...

 

And after n repetitions, what happens? :shock:

[Lateralus]

This isn't news at all.

[Kwisatz]

I had heard of this theory a long time ago, and the news you posted only show that theory. I actually thought that a scientist had proven this theory somehow, proving the existence of at least one parallel universe.

 

But I see you disappointed me. :P

 

 

 

Personally I believe in an infinite amount of linear universes.

 

 

 

That is, once our current universe collapses, another will form. Statistically speaking, it could be the exact same as ours save for precisely one minor difference, no matter how minute the difference is. And once that universe collapses another could appear with any n number of differences, n being an impossibly high number that we could definitely think of as infinity. And so this cycle repeats an infinite number of times with new universes being formed that may or may not be the same as one that came before it...

 

And after n repetitions, what happens? :shock:

 

 

 

Nothing...

 

 

 

In other words universes form over and over. The universes could or could not be the same as any other given universe. There is an infinite number of these universes, but only one exists physically at any given time. For any universe there is an infinite number of identical ones. They are linearly arranged, but because there is an infinite number of any given one we can return to any universe or visit any given one by going only one direction - forward.

 

 

 

Backwards time travel might not be possible because of the possibility of paradoxes.

[The Real ET]

I had heard of this theory a long time ago, and the news you posted only show that theory. I actually thought that a scientist had proven this theory somehow, proving the existence of at least one parallel universe.

 

But I see you disappointed me. :P

 

 

 

Yeah, me too... -.-

 

 

 

I'm not even going to pretend to have any background with this kind of thing, but the theory seems impossible to me. There's only a certain amount of mass in the universe, so where would all the mass for a parallel universe come from? Some could argue black holes, but unless some planets are sucked in, a black hole can't get all the elements needed to complete the periodic table let alone to create a whole new universe. Also, why would something so small and insignificant (like the motorcycle scenario) compared to a universal scenario, create a whole new universe?

[indy500fan]

I'm not even going to pretend to have any background with this kind of thing, but the theory seems impossible to me. There's only a certain amount of mass in the universe, so where would all the mass for a parallel universe come from? Some could argue black holes, but unless some planets are sucked in, a black hole can't get all the elements needed to complete the periodic table let alone to create a whole new universe. Also, why would something so small and insignificant (like the motorcycle scenario) compared to a universal scenario, create a whole new universe?

 

 

 

There's a certain amount of matter/energy in our universe. A parallel universe wouldn't get it from ours, it would have it's own.

[Giordano]

To explain better, we need a word higher than Universe. Like this:

 

Planet -> Solar System -> Galaxy -> Universe -> ???

 

 

 

To this theory and my personal belief (at least theoriticly (SP)) there are many universes in the ??? which possibly could be several in ???+1, etc, etc...

[indy500fan]

To explain better, we need a word higher than Universe. Like this:

 

Planet -> Solar System -> Galaxy -> Universe -> ???

 

 

 

To this theory and my personal belief (at least theoriticly (SP)) there are many universes in the ??? which possibly could be several in ???+1, etc, etc...

 

 

 

Omniverse. Uni:1, Multi:>1, Omni:all

[Giordano]

To explain better, we need a word higher than Universe. Like this:

 

Planet -> Solar System -> Galaxy -> Universe -> ???

 

 

 

To this theory and my personal belief (at least theoriticly (SP)) there are many universes in the ??? which possibly could be several in ???+1, etc, etc...

 

 

 

Omniverse. Uni:1, Multi:>1, Omni:all

 

There's my answer. :)

[stopspe]

I had heard of this theory before, and I have believed it, but its cool to see its not psuedoscience

[Rebdragon]

What the hell, I thought this up when I was five. They needed a PhD student at Princeton to make a guess like this?

 

 

 

Eh, I guess I'm interested in what proof they have for it according to quantum mechanics, but hopefully they have something to back it up -_-".

 

 

 

Er, ya. So anyone watch noien?

[indy500fan]

I had heard of this theory before, and I have believed it, but its cool to see its not psuedoscience

 

 

 

It's still psuedoscience because it can't be disproven.

[Mirror]

This just reminds me of Michael J. Fox and Back to the Future. :lol:

[navyplaya]

Sounds like a bunch of talking in circles if you ask me.

[meol]

I had heard of this theory before, and I have believed it, but its cool to see its not psuedoscience

 

 

 

It's still psuedoscience because it can't be disproven.

 

If it could be disproved, it would be nothing. :P

 

AFAIK, pseudoscience is something similar to science that doesn't follow a scientific method, (i.e. was made up and has no possible proof), like spontaneous generation or something like that.

[indy500fan]

I had heard of this theory before, and I have believed it, but its cool to see its not psuedoscience

 

 

 

It's still psuedoscience because it can't be disproven.

 

If it could be disproved, it would be nothing. :P

 

AFAIK, pseudoscience is something similar to science that doesn't follow a scientific method, (i.e. was made up and has no possible proof), like spontaneous generation or something like that.

 

 

 

If it CAN be disproven, not is it is disproven. Can is the operative word. It's called falsifiability and is part of the scientific method that you claim to know about.

[mrpez]

Does that mean there is another version of me alive somewhere else? I bet I pwn him.

[nicrune007]

Does that mean there is another version of me alive somewhere else? I bet I pwn him.

 

 

 

Mine will pwn yours hehe...

 

 

 

So is it possible to travel from one to another?

 

that would be ownage

[Led-Zeppelin]

Perhaps Craiglowery, in a parallel universe knows how to keep his not so interesting finds to himself? I would like to go there.