What do parallel universes mean for Christians

[the Vital One]

Physicists often claim that there are multiverses or parallel universes. Some claim that there are an unimaginably large number of these universes (or even an infinite number).

I'm interested in how Christians should approach the idea of other universes. The idea seems completely incompatible with Christianity.

 

[Job8]

I'm interested in how Christians should approach the idea of other universes. The idea seems completely incompatible with Christianity.

At least for the moment. No one knows what lies ahead in eternity, since God has given us brief glimpses, and some things are totally hidden.

 

[Grafted In]

I do not appose the idea that God has an infinite number of world's not all that unlike our own.
When I think about infinity and eternity, that throws the doors wise open for just about anything. If the universe is infinite then how could anyone say with certainty that no other world's exist that have living beings created by God.
Only Scripture would disprove that likelyhood in my mind and as yet I've found no such verse (s).

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

The idea seems completely incompatible with Christianity.

Incommensurable may be a better word that incompatible. The Christian theological tradition began very far removed from contemporary physics so one shouldn't be surprised of this.

 

[elopez]

Physicists often claim that there are multiverses or parallel universes. Some claim that there are an unimaginably large number of these universes (or even an infinite number).

Some physicists and cosmologists claim a multiverse, or parallel universe theory. Unfortunately for those that advocate these theories, there is no concrete, physical evidence of any kind. The most recent piece of "evidence" (I'm aware of) is from Ranga-Ram Chary from the California Institute of Technology. He thinks our universe is "bumping" into another one, as he was found a "bruise" in the cosmic background radiation of the universe. However, Joseph Silk of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, thinks this is a hasty conclusion, and that the "bruise" is due to foregrounds. Even Chary himself finds a 30 percent chance that what he's found is only background noise, and not evidence of a neighbouring universe at all.

I'm interested in how Christians should approach the idea of other universes

Just as above. There is no evidence. All evidence points to a beginning. At Hawking's 70th birthday celebration, Dr. Alexander Vilenkin pretty much layed to rest the multiverse theory, concluding "All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning."

http://www.blogos.org/compellingtruth/multiverse.html

 

[Merlin]

The amount of universes does not matter.
Our relationship is with Jesus and depends on our accepting his sacrifice for our sins.

 

[havevisions]

One has to remember that scientists have used models to explain their mathematical calculations. So these are only theories. Just like the Big Bang is a model.

I learned this in freshman calculus when we learned about "Gabriel's Horn". Its the geometrical result of revolving the graph of y= 1/x around the x-axis using the limits of 1 to infinity. Well, it turns out that the Euclidean geometry is not a possible model since the resulting figure has infinite surface area but finite volume. (a paradox) (One instructor tried to explain this by saying that the volume is finite since the molecules will eventually "stop up" and block the exit for other molecules: ha)
In other words, models are great, but how do we know that there aren't "other" models. We don't.
The parallel universe is a great model, but its not a proof.

 

[Grafted In]

The amount of universes does not matter.
Our relationship is with Jesus and depends on our accepting his sacrifice for our sins.

I know, but some of us enjoy brainstorming. I've been facinated with an endless universe since I was a young child.
Besides, though one could easily make the claim that His intent was not what we think He meant, Jesus made references to His creation such as "Consider the lilies...
I firmly believe He enjoys it when we take time to consider His magnificent creation. But not to obsess.
Besides, new things are discovered every day.
Check out NASA's sight. When you download their app there are thousands of photos and videos shot from various satellites. For me the shots of the surface of Mars are particularly fascinating. And the continue adding shots taken of the surface of Pluto as that ship passes it by. Mountainous areas thought to be consisting of solid nitrogen blocks.

 

[dms1972]

He thinks our universe is "bumping" into another one, as he was found a "bruise" in the cosmic background radiation of the universe.

Would that not assume a wider space that multiple universes exist in? How does one universe bump into another?

Space telescopes are not powerful enough to see all of the universe.

 

[Willtor]

Would that not assume a wider space that multiple universes exist in? How does one universe bump into another?

Space telescopes are not powerful enough to see all of the universe.

I feel a little silly and totally underqualified to talk about this, but...

The idea of multiple universes is that they can exist very close to one another and even "bump" causing a transfer in energy. If you consider many spacial dimensions, other universes could even be very close to you, personally, like centimeters away. You wouldn't need telescopes to see them (and telescopes wouldn't even help you see them -- though, perhaps, evidence of them could be seen with a telescope).

 

[dms1972]

I feel a little silly and totally underqualified to talk about this, but...

Several leading scientists dismiss it, including Roger Penrose, Steven Weinberg, and Paul Davies who says its a leap of faith, and not science. Of course there are some big names that support it, including Steven Hawking I think. So that doesn't really tell us anything about whether it is true.

The question seems to be whether it is science?

The hypothesis seems to have been doing the rounds before the observations!

 

[Wgw]

Some physicists and cosmologists claim a multiverse, or parallel universe theory. Unfortunately for those that advocate these theories, there is no concrete, physical evidence of any kind. The most recent piece of "evidence" (I'm aware of) is from Ranga-Ram Chary from the California Institute of Technology. He thinks our universe is "bumping" into another one, as he was found a "bruise" in the cosmic background radiation of the universe. However, Joseph Silk of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, thinks this is a hasty conclusion, and that the "bruise" is due to foregrounds. Even Chary himself finds a 30 percent chance that what he's found is only background noise, and not evidence of a neighbouring universe at all.


Just as above. There is no evidence. All evidence points to a beginning. At Hawking's 70th birthday celebration, Dr. Alexander Vilenkin pretty much layed to rest the multiverse theory, concluding "All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning."

http://www.blogos.org/compellingtruth/multiverse.html

This is in fact unrelated to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, which resolves Shroedinger's Cat by saying after decoherence, you have two universes or realities: one in which the cat is alive, and one in which the cat is dead. Thus you get a world for each possible outcome of a quantum event.

Since there were no events before the Big Bang, there would have been only one world pertinent to the monobloc. After the Big Bang, one would see a geometric increase i the number of universes proportionate to the number of quantum events, which aligns neatly with the idea of entropy.

I am not greatly interested in adapting Christianity to give a mystica interpretation to this hypothesis, in that it itself is probably not falsifiable, in that communication between parallel worlds created in this manner is apparently impossible.

 

[Willtor]

Several leading scientists dismiss it, including Roger Penrose, Steven Weinberg, and Paul Davies who says its a leap of faith, and not science. Of course there are some big names that support it, including Steven Hawking I think. So that doesn't really tell us anything about whether it is true.

The question seems to be whether it is science?

The hypothesis seems to have been doing the rounds before the observations!

This is, indeed, the question. It's in a grey area where the definition of "science" is somewhat ambiguous. If parsimony trumps testability, it's scientific... otherwise no.

 

[The Portuguese Baptist]

Physicists often claim that there are multiverses or parallel universes. Some claim that there are an unimaginably large number of these universes (or even an infinite number).

I'm interested in how Christians should approach the idea of other universes. The idea seems completely incompatible with Christianity.

What do parallel universes mean for Christians? I think it means that some people have got nothing better to do with their lives!

Now seriously. The Bible says nothing about parallel universes; so, for all we know, there could really be. However, such an idea is so strange, and never even hinted at in the Bible, that I think it is probably not true. However, I cannot make firm and absolute statements.

 

[BobRyan]

Physicists often claim that there are multiverses or parallel universes. Some claim that there are an unimaginably large number of these universes (or even an infinite number).

I'm interested in how Christians should approach the idea of other universes. The idea seems completely incompatible with Christianity.

1. There is absolutely no science observation that has confirmed - discovered any universe but our own. In fact we can't even see across our own universe due to its size. The dimensions of the "Visible universe" much smaller than our actual universe.
2. The "necessity" of a religion that needs to "imagine" other entire universes is directly connected to observations in nature in this universe - where atheist scientists were confronted with an atheist dilemma. A choice between admitting to a 'designer' for this Universe or leaping out into thin air with wild stories about an unlimitted number of flawed and often failed universes that might make this perfectly functioning one more 'believable' as a "pure accident".
3. To the Christian this reveals a desperate "belief system" in atheism that is every bit as willing to embrace faith in massive unknowns - equal to or larger than Christianity.

 

[BobRyan]

This is in fact unrelated to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, which resolves Shroedinger's Cat by saying after decoherence, you have two universes or realities: one in which the cat is alive, and one in which the cat is dead. Thus you get a world for each possible outcome of a quantum event.

Since there were no events before the Big Bang, there would have been only one world pertinent to the monobloc. After the Big Bang, one would see a geometric increase i the number of universes proportionate to the number of quantum events, which aligns neatly with the idea of entropy.

I am not greatly interested in adapting Christianity to give a mystica interpretation to this hypothesis, in that it itself is probably not falsifiable, in that communication between parallel worlds created in this manner is apparently impossible.

Quantum entanglement does not lead to alternate worlds where macro events are all the same "except for one". Creating an entire world for each such "alternate" event.

 

[Wgw]

Quantum entanglement does not lead to alternate worlds where macro events are all the same "except for one". Creating an entire world for each such "alternate" event.

The "many worlds" interpretation, which is a popular alternative to, for example, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, says otherwise. However at present we lack an epistemological basis for knowing, one way or the other. This thread however seems predicated on the basis of the sort of speculation that "many worlds" enables.

 

[Smidlee]

An amp can only amplify a signal up to the maximum voltage. Try to amplify a signal pass the maximum voltage will cause clipping. That is clips off the top and bottom of the waves. When this happens it sound terrible. The same with science which is a product of human reasoning. The maximum heights science can reach is human reasoning. When it tries to explain something beyond human reasoning it start make a awful noise (a butch of nonsense) , like black holes, dark matter, dark energy, multiple universes, 11 dimensions. Christians should be very careful when man starts to babble something that's over their head.

 

[Wgw]

An amp can only amplify a signal up to the maximum voltage. Try to amplify a signal pass the maximum voltage will cause clipping. That is clips off the top and bottom of the waves. When this happens it sound terrible. The same with science which is a product of human reasoning. The maximum heights science can reach is human reasoning. When it tries to explain something beyond human reasoning it start make a awful noise (a butch of nonsense) , like black holes, dark matter, dark energy, multiple universes, 11 dimensions. Christians should be very careful when man starts to babble something that's over their head.

Black holes are certainly not beyond human reasoning; we can observe them.

 

[Smidlee]

Black holes are certainly not beyond human reasoning; we can observe them.

We observe something has an effect on stars but no one has actually "observe" them. Look how wrong they were about Pluto and that's in our own backyard.