Post reply

Reply to the message by xeno6696

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> > >  > > Matt: Shortly I&apos;ll have more to offer here.  I&apos;ve been reading "A Universe from Nothing" from Krauss, and while honing my cosmological perspective, he pointed out some things I missed... > >  > > Such as the fact that an infinitely expanding universe mathematically guarantees a multiverse...  David will choke on his morning coffee on that one.  But I checked his work, and its correct, even intuitively, which is the approach Krauss took in that book. >  > I won&apos;t choke at all. I&apos;m way ahead of you. Look up Valenkin&apos;s recent work and conclusion that even the multiverse had to have a beginning. I&apos;ve got it here somewhere. Also philosophically you cannot get something from nothing. I have criticisms of Krauss&apos; pseudo-philosophic mistakes in my new book.-The only real philosophical mistake he made is in his dismissal of why questions.  I don&apos;t disagree with him however, that how questions are imminently preferable.  And even if a multiverse is inevitable, and may have had a beginning, it automatically means that chance is no longer a problem.  Given that our universe is infinitely large, I still think you can make the argument that every possible configuration of matter in the universe has been created multiple times, purely by natural law.  Chance is a false bugaboo, especially the more you play with the total amount of matter we estimate the universe holds, and you add in the nature of "virtual particles" which was the singlehandedly best description of quantum mechanics I have ever read.