
Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
The multiverse theory exists only to solve a problem called “Fine-tuning the Universe”. Its essence is as follows. Long ago, physicists discovered that the fundamental constants in our universe are surprisingly well-chosen. A deviation of a few percent from even one of these constants makes it impossible for stars to even exist. Not to mention solid planets and organic matter. And this immediately raises a question. How did this happen? Obviously, there could be no gradual evolution of the fundamental constants. They couldn't have been initially random, but over time they somehow adjusted themselves to the actual values. So someone set them up right away on purpose. But who? God? Science does not accept this version. So we need some other explanation. And such an explanation is the theory of the multiverse. According to it, the fundamental constants have random values, but in each of the many universes they are different. And only our universe is so lucky. In the rest, as it should be, there are not even stars. Oops! And the problem is no longer there. The successful values of the constants are explained, but there is still no God. How can we prove that other universes exist at all? But nothing. You just have to believe. Other universes, they are like God. They can't be seen or otherwise detected from ours.
The most recent example that I read and saw some kind of direct contrivance of what individual theorists do:
Cosmologists have “resolved” the habitability of multiverse worlds with a different amount of dark energy
https://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=3017593
And this is all science, too?