Why Some Scientists Embrace the 'Multiverse
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
you lied... I showed you to be a liar and now you are making some b.s. excuse for lying.
did susskind say that or not... is that the science or not..
you are such a troll.
so here it is plain as fricken day again... in a super respected series which interviews tons of top scientists.
(which you have seen and keep lying about)
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/2cT4zZIHR3s?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
did susskind say that or not... is that the science or not..
you are such a troll.
so here it is plain as fricken day again... in a super respected series which interviews tons of top scientists.
(which you have seen and keep lying about)
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/2cT4zZIHR3s?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
you are the delusion troll.
susskind has never dismissed the fine tuning of the comological constant. you are suck a liar... and the above videos show it.
also...
one page ago.... you said this..
"No you haven't. Deluded yourself more like, into believing you have provided video or links with top scientists showing you cosmological constant is "tuned" to 120 decimal places.
But actually, you haven't."
The videos above prove you to be a delusional liar.
try finding a quote within the context of a page showing that you bullshitting troll.
Just like in the videos...
Susskind explains the fine tuning of the cosmological constant. .
He explains that just a few universes would not explain how finely tuned our is... but when polchinski caluculated 10 to the 500 solutions to string theory.. if those solutions were actually real universes... then that would be enough other chances to explain why you might expect one universe to be this finely tuned.
You are the biggest science denying troll on the internet.
you just lie about science? to suit you 1950s random chance ignorant world view.
Just like in the videos...
Susskind explains the fine tuning of the cosmological constant. .
He explains that just a few universes would not explain how finely tuned our is... but when polchinski caluculated 10 to the 500 solutions to string theory.. if those solutions were actually real universes... then that would be enough other chances to explain why you might expect one universe to be this finely tuned.
You are the biggest science denying troll on the internet.
you just lie about science? to suit you 1950s random chance ignorant world view.
Fine. So what the hell is your beef. You're "following the science" aren't you. Isn't that what you said.
The only science Susskind explains says multiverse. Which btw wouldn't explain this one as finely tuned, but rather it disposes of any so called fine tuning argument. Just like not having enough information to suppose the universe is fine tuned does anyway. Which is the position right now.
You keep posting Susskind... you're following the science... you have multiverse. No good cursing me as you struggle in trying to come to terms with your own illogical non-argument.
Define friendly. From a human perspective the universe is very friendly, until it isn't.
The universe is neither friendly or bad. A Creator is neither friendly or bad. It just is. The universe/life was created and now it goes on it's own. Even the Creator knows not where, nor does it care. The Creator has no human characteristics and it's a fools errand trying to define what it is in human terms. We will not be rewarded or punished for our lives here. Any reward or punishment is in the here and now. Once this ends, we will simply change as we have for all eternity. This is what I believe until proof positive is demonstrated. Obviously I could be dead wrong about it all.
I'm suspecting, and frankly hoping to be surprised at death. One of those, broad smile, no shit kind of moments. To experience otherwise will leave me disappointed.