Why Some Scientists Embrace the 'Multiverse
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
I would agree... that if the quote is not real, it was a bad turn.
I try to avoid making mistakes like that.
But, I had no reason to suspect its not real as I had heard it many times before.
If it turns out it was not a quote from Einstein I will provide a mea culpa. (although it has little to do with the main point of my discussion here.)
I try to avoid making mistakes like that.
But, I had no reason to suspect its not real as I had heard it many times before.
If it turns out it was not a quote from Einstein I will provide a mea culpa. (although it has little to do with the main point of my discussion here.)
so your proposition is what --- that because of this sphinx question being posed in a book during Einsteins lifetime, there is no way he answered someone elses similar question in a similar manner?
Why don't you just give us the link to the person questioning whether Einstein could have answered a similar question to the this question about the sphinx.
If it turns out the person makes a great argument that einstein never made that quote fine.
but this cat and mouse shit you are playing is ridiculous.
What is your exact statement.
What are your facts supporting it.
tuner is what some scientists say.
British cosmologist Bernard Carr says, âyou might have to have a fine-tuner. If you donât want God, youâd better have a multiverse.â (Discover, December 2008)
does it feel better to you if we go with Hawking when he said fine tuned as if prescribed by an outside agency? (I will get the exact quote again for you.)
"In fact if one does adopt a bottom-up approach to cosmology, one is immediately led to an essentially classical framework, in which one loses all ability to explain cosmologyâs central question - why our universe is the way it is. In particular a
bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned [10] - as if prescribed by an outside agency
3See [6, 7, 8, 9] for recent work on the existence and the construction of observables in cosmological
spacetimes.1"
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf
which by the way... if you want attribute the gravity quote to hawking... it is against the above reality that he speculates about multiverses and therein gravity causing the formation of a line of universes which could sustain life.
On one hand we have the fact our universe looks as if fine tuned by an outside agency... vs...
the massive speculation about infinite other universes.
bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned [10] - as if prescribed by an outside agency
3See [6, 7, 8, 9] for recent work on the existence and the construction of observables in cosmological
spacetimes.1"
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf
which by the way... if you want attribute the gravity quote to hawking... it is against the above reality that he speculates about multiverses and therein gravity causing the formation of a line of universes which could sustain life.
On one hand we have the fact our universe looks as if fine tuned by an outside agency... vs...
the massive speculation about infinite other universes.