• Question: What do you think of the infinite universe theory? Why or why not do you think it is accurate?

    Asked by Fiona to Barbara, Matt, Ravinder, Sophie, Tristan on 13 Mar 2015.
    • Photo: Barbara Shih

      Barbara Shih answered on 13 Mar 2015:

      I feel like since I’m not a theoretical physicist, I can’t really make much comment on whether if it is accurate. My limited understanding of the infinite universe theory leads me to believe that it can’t really be proved or disproved, so it’s a little irrelevant. Good theory for being used in tv storylines though.

    • Photo: Matthew Moore

      Matthew Moore answered on 13 Mar 2015:

      It depends and I’m not sure! So a number of scientific models suggest a number of different ways in which a multiverse could exist.

      We live in the observable universe and beyond that theoretical physicists (notably Brian Greene) have schemes for hypothesising the potential landscape beyond our universe. Firstly, these are (as far as we currently understand the fabric of the universe) unfalsifiable, no evidence from within the observable universe could really impact upon whether there are multiple or infinite universes outside of ours!

      To really have an opinion either way I would have to better understand M-theory (or string theory).

      Also as these are arguably unscientific they should always be subject to occams razor where more complicated explanations are gotten rid of in favour of the simplest possible explanation. However, there are disputes about how best to apply Occams razor with regards to the multiverse.

      These disputes arise because the multiverse seems to violate occams razor in using increasing complexity to explain complexity.
      –However, some argue that due to Kolmogorov complexity, a principle in algorithmic theory in which the algorithmic entropy of an object such as a string (for example text “aatagcatagc”) reveals the computational power required to refer to it. As long as this complexity is small relative to the strings size then it doesn’t violate occams razor.

      Imagine an alphabet for example, it might be simpler for a program to specify, by some algorithm, the entire alphabet than to specify just a single letter as an integral part of the program.

      This neatly shows that while just a hypothesis currently, it’s not disposed of by occams razor and there might yet be experimental evidence for other universes in the future (such as a gravitational pull of one of them on ours though such experiments have so far been inconsequential).

Comments