/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4761969
>space beyond our universe

I don't think you understand what "universe" means

>>4761984
There's gotta be a way to get to the other universes.

>>4761985
Not same anon but you're missing his point. Space is a property of the universe.

universe = everything
Its like saying "I'm going to count past infinity".
What I think you mean is: Solar System.

>>4761985
>"other universes"

WTF are you talking about?
This is /sci/ not /sci-fi/.
There is no evidence for "other universes" what so fucking ever!

/x/-------------------->

You are a moron.

What is with the abrupt outburst of philosophy/metaphysics threads?

This place never ceases to turn to shit.

The universe is a group of matter and energy that is able to interact. The term multiverse will simply mean all matter and energy that exists, whether it can interact or not.

Do you not want to break the membrane separating these universes?

>>4761995
Well actually the existence of our universe is evidence for the existence of others. Pretty weak evidence, granted. Besides all that Multiverse hypotheses provide pretty handy models.

>>4761998
>universe = everything
You're forgetting the other universes and planes of existence.

>>4761993
>Not same anon but you're missing his point. Space is a property of the universe.

If the Universe is expanding what is it expanding into? What is its expansion displacing?

>>4761985
>theres gotta

no there doesnt. the universe/multiverse doesnt have to be laid out for human convenience. if it did light would travel infinitely fast and the universe would be much smaller and not expanding.

>>4762011

>>4762020
>tries to apply shitty euclidean geometry to everything

>>4762008
/b/ raid

Im calling it

>>4762028
Why? You don't see the usefulness of multiverse hypotheses, or you don't see the existence of the universe as evidence for the existence of others - its proof that universes can exist, and hence evidence that others may.

>>4762086
Are you retarded? Trolling? The existance of one "x", doesn't automatically imply other "x" exist. That is not valid logic, or reasoning.

Stop being a fucking cunt!

>>4762086
The existance of Carl Sagan, implies multiple Carl Sagan exist?

>>4762103
>>4762100
Do you guys understand the meaning of 'evidence'? Its not at all similar to proof.

>>4762140
> Evidence is not at all similar to proof

Not the way you do it, that's for sure.

>>4762140
STFU AND GTFO!

>mfw all these terrible threads on /sci/ tonight

Yeah, fuck this. Hopefully there will be some better discussion tomorrow.

>>4762146
Not the way anyone does it - anyone who understands English anyway. Anything which reduces the set of possibilities in favour of something is evidence for it. The set of possibilities in terms of existence of multiple universes was {0, 1, 2, ...} universes exist, under the observation that our own exists it becomes {1, 2, ...} universes exist. Same cardinality, but its a starting case for induction, and hence its evidence.

>>4762171
>incoherent trollin is incoherent

0/100

>>4762177
The irony.