Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

Parallel universes exist

Name: Anonymous 2007-09-30 0:57 ID:t+GEcp2/

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.

lonk

http://www.breitbart.com/print.php?id=paUniverse_sun14_parallel_universes&show_article=1&cat=0

Name: 4tran 2007-09-30 1:33 ID:Heaven

What did the Oxford team do that Everett didn't?

Name: Anonymous 2007-09-30 7:39 ID:YHfdI0k/

"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."

So humans create reality by looking at it? Makes sense to me!

Name: Anonymous 2007-09-30 12:43 ID:MRtROZsW

More like when an observer makes a measurement, the interaction of measurement device and "stuff" produces the measured observation.

Name: Anonymous 2007-09-30 13:40 ID:fxy/NulD

>>3
observation != human observation.  but sure, make up what the fuck ever you want.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-01 6:35 ID:UavfJx2p

>>5
Elaboration required. I am not aware of any "observation" coming from something other than a living being.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-01 6:38 ID:Q1i4jYKW

>>6 how about a camera or just photons bouncing off a surface

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-01 8:42 ID:svNI+WvN

so, guys, what do you all think about higgs bosons? i heard they should be pretty neat at 135 GeV.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-01 22:01 ID:UavfJx2p

>>7
Er... I think I'm still missing something. How could photons NOT be bouncing off of something? There is no such thing as an actual vacuum, and no such thing as total darkness, right? What exceptions are there? Even black holes have light going into them, correct?

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-02 0:19 ID:MO5+gTDa

>>8
I'm waiting for a box of them from eBay, going to put them in my boss's coffee and make her think she's getting fat.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-05 15:48

This is related to M-theory and as interesting as M-theory is, it has never been experimentally tested. M-theory only has pure mathematical implications of its existence. According to the theory, gravity and other forces are coming from parallel universes, and we are getting the tail end of gravity from another universe (which explains why gravity is so weak.) Unfortunately, it is just a philosophy with mathematics. M-theory leaps beyond how science should study nature.
I find M-theory's proposal of parallel universes interesting, but I'm still a bit skeptical of the theory.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-09 20:14

Yes, they do.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-09 20:15

Yes, they do.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 3:51

[r]fuck white people[/r]

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 3:51

^^fuckhead

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 3:55

>>3
>>9

I invite you to watch this children's educational video, which explains a topic that you apparently have no clue about.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 7:22

Fuck your goddamn M-theory. That shit has got nothing to do with the Everett interpretation. Go jerk your nuts on a fucking fivebrane and then get back to me.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 8:08

I have a theory that the universe has a whole bag of dimensions rolled up into small colorful spheres filled with chocolate.
Unfortunately I have had some problems getting experimentally verifiable predictions from my M&M-theory.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 8:13

Shit, your M&M theory is still better than the landscape.

Name: RedCream 2007-10-10 10:59

BWAAAAA HAA HAAAAAAA HAAAA HAAA HAAAAA HA HAAA HAA HAAAAA!

"Parallel universes"!  PROVE THAT FUCKING CLAIM, YOU MORONS!

I swear, Physics is the new religion.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 11:21

Why don't you run the "quantum suicide" experiment and report back to us?

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 12:21

BWAAAAA HAA HAAAAAAA HAAAA HAAA HAAAAA HA HAAA HAA HAAAAA!

"An afterlife"!  PROVE THAT FUCKING CLAIM, YOU MORONS!

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 12:23

>>1
Too late, science fiction writers beat you to the punch by a whooooole bunch of miles. ever hoida S.M. Sterling and Harry Turtledove?

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 14:14

>>16
I realize Anonymous is a pompous faggot, but this is going over the line.

Name: Anonymous 2007-10-10 18:32

>>1

Those science fiction writers have noone else to credit but the physicists.

Also, parallel universes could be very plausible with certain things like the higgs boson not existing and all...maybe it's just another universe parallel to us.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List