What do parallel universes mean for Christians

[Inkfingers]

No, there need be no "gap." In fact, that's the essential point of calling it a different "universe." It would like point-for-point within the same space of this universe.

That's nonsense though.

This universe takes up all of the space here. You cannot fit a whole other universe, with all its necessary forces and interactions, in the same space because the very distinction between two different universe would just be gibberish.

It's like holding up an apple and claiming 1400 other apples are in exactly the same space.

 

[RDKirk]

That's nonsense though.

This universe takes up all of the space here. You cannot fit a whole other universe, with all its necessary forces and interactions, in the same space because the very distinction between two different universe would just be gibberish.

It's like holding up an apple and claiming 1400 other apples are in exactly the same space.

See post #82

 

[Archie the Preacher]

It would work. An "alternate universe" model works in Christian spirituality concepts.

Yes, it could. In some sense, Hell and Heaven both are 'alternate' realities in that 'we' (humans or any being from this Universe/reality) cannot travel in any ordinary sense of the word and reach them. Not by car, boat, space ship or so forth.

If I'm recalling correctly - it's been more than twenty minutes - when I made the 'never heard it' statement, I was thinking of "theologians" of the sort with letters and such following their name. However, I think most of the ilk will agree to not getting there by physical means. Perhaps sounding too 'sciency' or 'science-fictiony' is bad for one's image?

Of course I haven't heard it from the Secularists, either. They refuse the existence of such places in any event.

 

[Inkfingers]

See post #82

God isn't a parallel universe.

And as I said, for two universes to actually exist requires something to be a barrier between them. And for it to be a barrier between them it has to interact with both of them. Which means that it isn't a barrier, its a bridge...and thus they are all one universe really.

Long answer made short - there's no such thing as parallel universes

 

[RDKirk]

God isn't a parallel universe.

I think it's totally possible to imagine God as a parallel universe in Himself. If you watched "Flatland the Film," the being inhabiting the "single point" universe would be descriptive of God: Simultaneously inhabiting the entirely of his universe.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

God isn't a parallel universe.

And as I said, for two universes to actually exist requires something to be a barrier between them. And for it to be a barrier between them it has to interact with both of them. Which means that it isn't a barrier, its a bridge...and thus they are all one universe really.

I find the argument in this paragraph remarkably short on substance. Your notion of "... it [the barrier between this Universe and any other] isn't a barrier, it's a bridge..." is self-contradictory. It is self-contradictory without any explanation or argument to turn the barrier into a bridge. But I bet you'll hold on to it.

Long answer made short - there's no such thing as parallel universes

Which seems to be the point from which you started. It strikes me you've confirmed your own assumption.

I can see a very strong logical objection to the "M Theory" concept of parallel Universes; indeed I believe I already outlined it. However, the concept of parallel Universes do not contradict the nature of God or the teaching of the Bible.

 

[Inkfingers]

I think it's totally possible to imagine God as a parallel universe in Himself. If you watched "Flatland the Film," the being inhabiting the "single point" universe would be descriptive of God: Simultaneously inhabiting the entirely of his universe.

A parallel universe would be (theoretically, because it cannot exist) utterly seperate from this one.

God is not utterly seperate from the universe. If He were, he would not be able to interact with it.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

My point is that there cannot be more than one universe, as for there to be more than one there would have to be a gap between them...and that gap would have to be filled with something real which interacted fully with both universe 1 and universe 2. Which would mean they were all actually 1 single universe which someone has arbitrarily called 2 different universes.

If you see what I mean.

The reason your atoms bang into each other and work together to form larger bodies is because they all work with the same electromagnetic force together with - or opposed to - each other. There also exist the "weak" nuclear force, the "strong" nuclear force, and the gravitational force.

Now if a particle existed that responded to an alternate set of forces . . . . say electro-magnetic force b, etc etc . . . but not to our known forces . . . . it could easily carry on in the same place at the same time but without bothering to affect us at all. Or we it.

Maybe the so called "dark matter" is exactly that, only it shares the gravitational force with us.

 

[Inkfingers]

The reason your atoms bang into each other and work together to form larger bodies is because they all work with the same electromagnetic force together with - or opposed to - each other. There also exist the "weak" nuclear force, the "strong" nuclear force, and the gravitational force.

Now if a particle existed that responded to an alternate set of forces . . . . say electro-magnetic force b, etc etc . . . but not to our known forces . . . . it could easily carry on in the same place at the same time but without bothering to affect us at all. Or we it.

Everyt part of this universe is filled with 'substance'. There are no gaps in which something can exist which does not interact with its surroundings. The existence of such a gap would mean an effective hole in space-time, and that hole would need a barrier point between it and this universe....and that barrier point would have to interact with both the gap and this universe, meaning that it isn't actually a barrier after all but is a connector between this universe and the hypothesised gap.....which obviously means the gap isn't a gap at all but just a misperceived part of the same universe as us.

Parallel universes are impossible.

They cannot exist because anything that divides us from them would actually also join us to them and so they would not be parallel after all (but part of the same universe as us).

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Everyt part of this universe is filled with 'substance'. There are no gaps in which something can exist which does not interact with its surroundings. The existence of such a gap would mean an effective hole in space-time, and that hole would need a barrier point between it and this universe....and that barrier point would have to interact with both the gap and this universe, meaning that it isn't actually a barrier after all but is a connector between this universe and the hypothesised gap.....which obviously means the gap isn't a gap at all but just a misperceived part of the same universe as us.

Parallel universes are impossible.

They cannot exist because anything that divides us from them would actually also join us to them and so they would not be parallel after all (but part of the same universe as us).

Sorry, saying something is so doesn't make it so.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

A parallel universe would be (theoretically, because it cannot exist) utterly seperate from this one.

God is not utterly seperate from the universe. If He were, he would not be able to interact with it.

You're not confusing God with a parallel universe, are you?

Of course, God is 'utterly separate' from the Universe in the common understanding: We cannot physically get to Him by any means of our own. We cannot see Him, we cannot call Him on the telephone, cannot send Him a telegram, cannot touch Him, cannot buy Him a cup of coffee and so forth.

Which is not to say He can't get to us, any way He chooses.

However, none of this removes the onus from you of explaining your claims. God is - by definition - supernatural. That is, beyond and removed from nature. At least in the way we humans deal with nature. Claiming He is not totally separate does not deny the possibility of parallel universes.

Nor does your repetitive claims parallel universes cannot exist mean anything. Other than you don't like the idea.

 

[theHighlander]

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.

The multiverse and the string theory is not physics, just crackpot claims made by pseudo-scientists. There is no evidence nor a way to test these claims as I explain in this video anyone can make such claims.

 

[Radrook]

The implications of an infinite number of universes where alternate timelines with different historical possibilities are in effect would pose serious religious problems for Christians.

 

[theHighlander]

They wouldn't since there is no multiverse.

 

[Radrook]

They wouldn't since there is no multiverse.

I am replying to a hypothetical. At least I assumed it is a hypothetical.

BTW
The multi-universe idea is based on the way that electrons unpredictably disappear and reappear as if they are going elsewhere and returning.

 

[BukiRob]

The implications of an infinite number of universes where alternate timelines with different historical possibilities are in effect would pose serious religious problems for Christians.

The multiverse theory has absolutely no physical evidence that it exists. It is strictly a mathematical theory and one that is not universally accepted as even being plausible. With things like dark energy and dark matter there IS evidence that it does indeed exist as we can measure its effect on things that we can see. No such evidence exists at all for a multiverse theory

 

[theHighlander]

The multiverse theory has absolutely no physical evidence that it exists. It is strictly a mathematical theory and one that is not universally accepted as even being plausible. With things like dark energy and dark matter there IS evidence that it does indeed exist as we can measure its effect on things that we can see. No such evidence exists at all for a multiverse theory

Actually no, there is no evidence that dark matter and dark energy exist. They are not directly observed, it's thought impossible to do so which is why they are still hypothetical.

 

[BukiRob]

Actually no, there is no evidence that dark matter and dark energy exist. They are not directly observed, it's thought impossible to do so which is why they are still hypothetical.

I didnt say that. What I said is there is evidence of the expected effects of the existence of Dark Matter and dark energy.

NASA - NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter

According to Nasa they have discovered evidence of the effects of dark matter.

 

[Revealing Times]

The implications of an infinite number of universes where alternate timelines with different historical possibilities are in effect would pose serious religious problems for Christians.

Just like the single universe we live in causes a problem for those that do not believe in God. The odds are so incredulous that this one universe could come into existence without a God guiding the process that the scientists had to come up with an untestable hypothesis to keep from looking foolish. Many cosmologists say that our universe coming into existence per chance is just out of the question, unless there is a multi-verse. And so that is why the multi-verse was invented....

 

[Steve Petersen]

The multiverse and the string theory is not physics, just crackpot claims made by pseudo-scientists. There is no evidence nor a way to test these claims as I explain in this video anyone can make such claims.

No, they are potential outcomes of a mathematical model of the universe.

If you have an open mind, this Nova program explains it well.