The Philosophical implications of Multiverse Theory?

I suppose..... that computers are only as good as the
users and programmers......... which reminds me of a fascinating meeting
reported by near death experiencer Christian Andreason.

http://www.allaboutchristian.com/spirituality/index.html
Chapter 3... sub heading......
Our spiritual brother, Albert Einstein

 

I don't see that this addresses the concerns I brought up in the post you quoted. We have lots of theories that compete for evidence, I fail to see the point in pointing me towards a particular one. I also fail to see what it has anything to do with the previous discussion. The concerns I bring up are with how we acquire information and believe in theories. Throwing another theory on the pile isn't going to change that.

 

Here are two updates from Graham P. in reply to my comment:

My reply to Graham P. :
I personally prefer to think of time...... as an invention.....
much like a car, or canoe, or 747 or yacht.......
designed by an Intelligence / Intelligences.... composed of fundamental or nearly fundamental energy.... who
invented time......
in order to assist others.......
humans, angels, perhaps aliens of some form.........
even perhaps fallen angels......
to progress spiritually and philosophically from point A to point B... and on and on and on... to higher and higher levels of wisdom, empathy, love, understanding, compassion for others.......

especially others that they might tend to define as "inferior."

Graham P.:

It will obviously take me a while to research what Graham P. writes and get back to him on this.

 

I am not sure if this will help but
this article does give something of an
explanation as to why scientists are
elaborating on this particular theory.

If you are not satisfied with this source, names are
given that could be researched further.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/22743...s-and-the-timelines-on-each-one-can-interact/

QUANTUM LEAPS Time travellers could use parallel dimensions to visit the past, scientists claim

So.... Multiverse Theory seems to be an improvement over
a simplistic understanding of Newtonian Physics........ and
they are hopeful that this will assist them in figuring out a way of
testing these theories.

 

I don't see the article mentioning anything about why it is believable.

However, I should mention that not only is justifications of belief something that you should know (about your own beliefs), the fact that you don't seem to have a clear understanding of what becomes believable and why casts severe doubts on the ideas you propose.

I mean, if you don't have a clear understanding of the reasons one might believe it, why are you talking about this theory and not any of the other theories out there?

Multiverse theories appeal to the human sense of storytelling and theatrics. Therefore, it can easily sound like you think this one is compelling because it sounds cool rather than because it's believable. I prefer to believe things that are true to those that are cool, and so I must be extra suspicious of cool sounding theories.

 

One of the reasons why I take
Multiverse Theory so serious is
because of the futures shown in one near death experience account
from 1967...... another one from 1975 and another one from 1985.....
where each near death experiencer was shown future events.......
the futures shown from each NDE get a little bit more positive......
which fits with at least some understandings of Multiverse Theory.

NDE accounts have given me the most easily understood and most attractive
ideas on philosophy that I have ever found.... so if Multiverse Theory helps to
explain what could be understood as a possible contradiction in NDE's... then
of course that does grab my attention.

Yes.... I am guilty..... I am biased toward these accounts being real!

I thought that the following article was quite brilliant.......
and made sense out of some scriptures that I had read since I was a teenager.

I feel more comfortable with these ideas than the rather fatalistic ideas
I had been taught while I was young.


http://www.near-death.com/science/research/future.html

The Future and the Near-Death Experience

 

Yes Dennis, it appears that quantum mechanics helps prevent the classic time paradoxes of time travel.

But if all possible versions of events happen when a person time travels that still leaves the possibility of that person causing an annihilation in some divergent state of reality...

 

I get the feeling the statistics behind near death experiences are not well understood. Between confirmation biases, availability biases and the like, I'm not convinced by the idea of NDEs. Like, who would report an experience that doesn't make sense? And if you don't know how many experiences don't make sense, how can you tell which ones are just correct because they specified something broad that came true by chance? Or reinterpretation of the NDE after something happens that might fit the prediction?

Even if the NDEs are true, it would be much more credible that the predictions came from accurate models of the future as produced in our world than from other universes in a multiverse. Obviously such models will change with more information, and the method by which information could travel between universes would have to be powerful enough to give NDEs but not show up in any brain scans, neuroscience or material investigations, which seems unlikely.

And even if we bought into the idea of information coming from other universes, why should those universes be able to predict anything about our universe? If they're different universes, it would be credible that the predictions don't match our universe, since they don't take place here.

 

Near death experiencer Dannion Brinkley was given about 117
very specific predictions about the future. Over ninety of them have already came to pass.....

He had his first NDE in 1975 and I read his first book back in the 1990's.

Even though some of what Dannion was shown has been delayed......
from the first time line that he was given.....

the level of accuracy of what he was shown is far, far, far beyond what the most well informed
historian or news media commentator could ever have guessed.


http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/some-people-receive-verified-visions-of-the-future.html
Some People Receive Verified Visions of the Future

 

Helen Wambach Ph. D. began a study back around 1965
that she felt could disprove the belief in reincarnation.

Her research backfired on her and she came to belief in
reincarnation firmly.

She and Dr. Chet Snow really got into something strange when they
progressed over 700 volunteers into what they perceived as the future.

From her data she felt that before the year 2300 there would be about a
ninety to ninety five percent depopulation of the world.

I am hopeful that in our time line... this can be largely prevented......
perhaps in our time line the death toll might be as low as thirty or forty percent.....
or even less.

In our time line some people are explaining the seriousness of our situation with a clarity and
power that is causing many of us to take our situation more seriously.


http://www.politicalforum.com/envir...long-term-effects-climate-change-logical.html
Is this analysis of the probable long term effects of climate change logical?

 

Dennis maybe they all go into space. An alien said to me I'd still be alive when my people become like their people. Of course their people were the ones to tell me that I'd go back to their place one day.

 

What are the primary sources on this? I fear that the original predictions may have been broad and quite likely to be true but that people subconsciously refined the exact statements after the fact. This is common, used by cold readers and the like. It has been used to "prove" things that are contradictory to each other and to reality.

 

Here is an example of one of Dannion's
predictions that has not happened yet but.......
this is better written and more logical than any
article or book that I have ever read on the
"mark of the beast."


http://www.qsl.net/w5www/brinkley.html

Because Dannion was shown this happening before the year 2000
I assume that that happened in the first time line that branched off first from his
1975 near death experience.

This problem has been delayed at least twenty years in our time line.

 

Well, if you allow for stuff like that, it makes it a lot more likely that chance generates something that you would accept as confirmation. Indeed, the fact that you would let them get away with stuff like that without taking it into account in your previous arguments for this being true means I can't trust your logic when it comes to finding out whether this is true.

 

Actually.....
my belief is that in our time line....
what Dannion Brinkley saw about a Middle Eastern
computer genius becoming extremely wealthy and controlling the world....

does NOT have to happen.

Multiverse Theory allows for genuinely new time lines to be
created that can be vastly less violent than previous time lines.

I felt that what Dannion saw happening between the nations of Jordan and
Israel......
has artistic value that could assist in bringing Jordan and Israel to a greater level of
cooperation.

They already have a lack of hostility.....
but real unity against ISIS and radical Islam would be a win, win, win
scenario for both nations.

To my thinking.... the primary value of what these people report about
a future..... not the future......
are useful.... because the foundation for that unity between those two nations.....
is still there even in a different time line... .where these exact events don't actually
have to be repeated.



Dannion Brinkley:

......................

Could the new color for the nation of Jordan be GREEN?

Book 005, Number 2208:

Google: Sahara Forest Project (Norway, Jordan, Qatar)

and The Sahara Solar Breeder Project (Japan)

To see how this can be done.

 

I love circular philosophical topics like this.

The multi-universe. A theory invented because of the limitations of the Big Bang. There is no beginning to the Big Bang just a explosion of existence from an unknown source. So...

Multi-Universe a convenient theory to hide the obvious complexity. Each universe existing in a bigger universe. But around we go. Back to the beginning, what created the universe within the universe?

 

There are different concepts all being called multiverse.

There's a divergence of states whenever a choice is made, the Universe splits into an infinite number of alternatives where each choice is realized.

There's universe bubbles where every bubble is its own universe with there being multiple bubbles out there if you could travel beyond the border of our own.

All of this is pointing to an infinite system. You claim it's circular reasoning, but it's not. It's infinity showing itself. The notion of a beginning, middle, and end is an error on our part from a faulty understanding, and limited perception. Time itself, although we sense it moving from past to present, in fact time is concurrent, that means what we think of the past, present, and future is all happening at once. The future has an effect on the past. This has been show in experiments.

- - - Updated - - -

Well Dennis an infinite multiverse means that everything happens. If you can imagine it, it happens. If you can't imagine it, it happens anyway, as long as it's possible.

Now just because Dannion Brinkley's timeline might exist doesn't mean we're part of it.

 

Tom Campbell and a few capable coworkers have supposedly traveled psychically (as OOBErs) to some other parts of our universe and a few levels up the multiverse. They concurred on their findings while traveling simultaneously and should be considered more qualified than most of us to suggest what are the real natures and workings of worlds beyond our normal perception. Tom's "monstrous" book My Big T.O.E. resolves many of the conflicting issues raised in this kind of thread.

The catch is that the choice to act generates the real existence of a branching universe. A thought in anticipation of such a choice and the possibility of that branch occurring may not necessarily dictate the coming into existence of that universe except in the form of a functional pattern or plan, i.e. a calculated reality. Otherwise the whole business would become a logjam using up all available resources due to gross runaway overproduction. The system has to be reasonably efficient; it does not operate free of limitations. Infinity lives where boundaries are out of reach, wherever that is. Within Tom’s perceivable extent of the multiverse, the consciousness system has divisions, for example LCS (larger consciousness system) etc.

There's no denying of infinite possibilities, but even the ones conjured up by the governing consciousness system are just calculated future possibilities that are retained no longer than their probability warrants during their approach towards present time. Tom explains it better than I can, and he lays it down well with labels such as past calculated probable realities, past actuated realities, and calculated future probable realities etc.

Calculated future probable realities are available for exploration by OOBErs. Also, remotely possible realities can be temporarily registered through branching due to an explorer's errant intent. Some of the calculated realities are encountered as bizarre scenarios or nightmares by minds that wander into them unknowingly during sleep or somewhat knowingly by those who tinker while lacking full understanding. Hence as suggested by Dennis Tate and others, such experience is not necessarily an indication of accurate prognostication but may serve to stimulate preventive consideration and put people on guard for possible unfavorable developments.

Note that Tom cites the multiverse as extending beyond our best nonphysical abilities to access and perceive, but having gone through the levels within reach he conveys a perspective much like that provided by advanced physics. Claiming that it extends infinitely is pure speculation; we don’t know and can’t know for sure whether it does or doesn’t.

Our universe is among several local ones, some of which are similar to ours and others where the rules (physical properties, physical laws, and lifeform interactions) are very dissimilar to ours. Ours is within a common parent universe whose rules are more liberal. Why it’s not necessarily better to be there instead of here makes for some interesting reading. Ours appears to be a genuine long-term artifact of ongoing evolutionary improvement.

 

The system has to be infinite the math says so, from the user: AboveAlpha one of the few people who knows the math.

 

Then instead I should have stated “Claiming that it extends infinitely is a moot point. Successive boundaries and multitudes of individual objects between here and infinity or at least between here and our maximum range of super-perception significantly hinder contribution from infinite resources.”

There are, of course, those who downplay or dismiss all claims that cannot be substantiated by empirical proof, including claims of mathematical proof predicting something that has not yet become verified by reality.

Better future knowledge of the total number of dimensions (likely eleven and the suspected 20 or 21 as conveyed by Above Alpha) could be expected to drastically change ways of thinking about these matters.

 

In his book Stephen Hawking's Universe,
in chapter 13 entitled The Anthropic Principle,
Dr. Hawking explains an Atheistic variation on
The Cyclic Model of the Universe that sure sounds like
what Mellen Benedict reported viewing during his NDE.

So Theoretical Physicists and Philosophers seem to be closer than ever before in history.

http://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/experiences/mellen-thomas-benedict.html#a05

 

Well some interesting things about the multiverse were discussed on page 12 of this topic.

Well, [MENTION=62877]AboveAlpha[/MENTION] is a good source of knowledge about the multiverse because he's creating his own multiversal theory about the multiverse. So he's the one to talk to about the multiverse.

Well I don't want to rain on your parade but just because everything that can happen does happen in an alternate divergent reality doesn't mean we have got it on the right track debating it philosophically.

 

I mean to say that out of body experiences take us on a flight of fancy. I know I've had some, and they're interesting, but anyone willing to write a book about them is probably a scammer.

I mean how many times is it they run into Jesus or heaven??? But then they get shown a doom and gloom prophesy about what happens to Earth in the future. These people aren't psychics, they're playing to the doom will come crowd.

 

You're getting back to irrelevant things again. None of this explains why I should believe it. This just gives you justification for ignoring arguments that go against it. While that does resolve some issues of faulty predictions, it means that your ideas lose falsifiability, which is important for us justifying out beliefs in it.

 

I am actually not trying to convince you that this is true.....
or provable.....
I am quite happy assisting you to come to the realization that this
information might be useful......
in inspiring at least some people to look at our situation differently,
have more hope for the future.....
be less pessimistic and fatalistic....
and be aware of at least some more options that can
assist our planet to move into a much more peaceful
and productive way of life for most of us......

If you regard this theory and the evidence for it
from parapsychology as useful.....
you will find a lot more evidence for it from
different angles......

For many years I did wonder at what seemed to be
contradictory evidence regarding the "future" and prophecies of various types.... but
Multiverse Theory made sense out of the seeming conflicts......

The following article is, in my opinion, brilliant and
assisted me to be more willing to accept the probable implications of
Multiverse Theory.....

http://www.near-death.com/science/research/future.html
The Future and the Near-Death Experience

Although the whole article is exceptional.....
Multiverse Theory indicates that the a better title might be
"Scientific evidence supporting the ability to predict a future, learn from
the prediction...... and initiate a new and better time line."

.....