How many multiverses are there?

I watched the 1:06 minute video, "How many multiverses are there?"

How Many Multiverses Are There? - YouTube

Watched it and it contained so many of my own pictures, so much of my own modeling, and even used so much of my description, particularly my late description with almost complete alteration in interpretations and deductions, I grew irritated. I knew I was not the only one pursuing forms of my own modeling, that it itself was a paralleling rail to rails others were laying down but then they go off on diverging tangents so irritating to me . . . as mine would be to them.

I take immortality in duplicate universes first, which I've dealt with a few times before. Duplication to infinity where an infinite number of you, exact duplicates of you, are living in exactly the same universes duplicated to infinity. I would tell these seers they will never meet since they are essentially quantum entangled. What I mean is they overlay and inlay in reality into just one (single) universe that is all these infinity of duplicate universes in one. Near duplicates in essentially different path lines is a different story, but the borders of these will never cross because there too many ever more differing borders and universes, to infinity, between.

With my own realization that there is no such thing as infinity of quality, I realized that there is no such thing as infinity of dimensions. Having read and thought much on Complexity Science, I confirmed early on, thanks partly to experience, my own view to my own satisfaction that beyond certain points complexity must collapse and fall in on itself. And complexity is exactly what multi-dimensionality is, so it cannot go beyond relativity's four closing box or bubble dimensions. That is what 3- and 4-dimensionality does, close the system.

The 4th dimension, though, is actually '0', the real bottom dimension with '1' (unity), binary base2 0|1 which mathematicians and physicists have not throughout history and still do not recognize as a bottom base singularity (of base2 [and/or] you will not go below) that I know of. Thus, because the primal / fundamental base is binary base 2 (fbb2 0|1) the 4-dimensional cube can be taken to infinity in number and size, and one finite and infinity within the other, of cube. It both opens and closes systems, and universes. It (fbb2 0|1, the double-barrel positive-negative chain-string, the sandwich of positive energy matter and negative energy anti-matter 'Flatland', and/or [grand unifying relativity's 4-dimensional magic cube) provides self-protection for the universe, and the countless universes of the Infinite Multiverse Universe. Dimensions can be built to infinities, but they always reduce to the base no matter what the infinity. It's there but it does not run away . . . it does not run amok, because it cannot.

The video speaks of sterile universes. Of course, because there are multi-levels, multi-horizons, multi-space-times of every universe of a multiverse. Stephen Hawking wrote of the ever shifting over "Life Zone" of our verse. I write of an infinite 'Flatland' horizontal versus, or perpendicular to, an infinite creative / destructive verticality.

People will have differing views (observations) of . . . differing interpretations of . . . differing dimensions for . . . exactly the same object or subject matter. Often irritating even when largely compatible.
 
Last edited:
A bit more on the "immortality" bit:

A cat lives nine lives, as the saying goes. You (your consciousness) will live infinities of lives, including many, many, different lives, but one of those infinities, an eternity (like pushing against a brick wall an infinite number of times, one of those times you will pass through it and come out the other side as if it had never been there at all).

Even in the life you've lived so far, every moment of that life it could have taken a different turn. You don't know it, but it did just that countless times. Just another branch of infinities of universes and near-worlds and universes to this one. Parallels. Branches and branching out. The Infinite Multiverse Universe has it all covered. There is no runaway universe, no run amok.
 
Last edited:
A little bit more on the immortality bit of that YouTube show:

Do you have a sense of Deja Vu every so often? Like if and when you are watching movies or series like Star Trek or Star Wars? Or an ancient period piece? Or even, occasionally, some fantasy flick? Or when you are reading a really good book and just know it's telling a story of events somewhere and/or somewhen you could almost swear you've lived?
 
Aug 1, 2023
11
1
15
Visit site
I watched the 1:06 minute video, "How many multiverses are there?"

How Many Multiverses Are There? - YouTube

Watched it and it contained so many of my own pictures, so much of my own modeling, and even used so much of my description, particularly my late description with almost complete alteration in interpretations and deductions, I grew irritated. I knew I was not the only one pursuing forms of my own modeling, that it itself was a paralleling rail to rails others were laying down but then they go off on diverging tangents so irritating to me . . . as mine would be to them.

I take immortality in duplicate universes first, which I've dealt with a few times before. Duplication to infinity where an infinite number of you, exact duplicates of you, are living in exactly the same universes duplicated to infinity. I would tell these seers they will never meet since they are essentially quantum entangled. What I mean is they overlay and inlay in reality into just one (single) universe that is all these infinity of duplicate universes in one. Near duplicates in essentially different path lines is a different story, but the borders of these will never cross because there too many ever more differing borders and universes, to infinity, between.

With my own realization that there is no such thing as infinity of quality, I realized that there is no such thing as infinity of dimensions. Having read and thought much on Complexity Science, I confirmed early on, thanks partly to experience, my own view to my own satisfaction that beyond certain points complexity must collapse and fall in on itself. And complexity is exactly what multi-dimensionality is, so it cannot go beyond relativity's four closing box or bubble dimensions. That is what 3- and 4-dimensionality does, close the system.

The 4th dimension, though, is actually '0', the real bottom dimension with '1' (unity), binary base2 0|1 which mathematicians and physicists have not throughout history and still do not recognize as a bottom base singularity (of base2 [and/or] you will not go below) that I know of. Thus, because the primal / fundamental base is binary base 2 (fbb2 0|1) the 4-dimensional cube can be taken to infinity in number and size, and one finite and infinity within the other, of cube. It both opens and closes systems, and universes. It (fbb2 0|1, the double-barrel positive-negative chain-string, the sandwich of positive energy matter and negative energy anti-matter 'Flatland', and/or [grand unifying relativity's 4-dimensional magic cube) provides self-protection for the universe, and the countless universes of the Infinite Multiverse Universe. Dimensions can be built to infinities, but they always reduce to the base no matter what the infinity. It's there but it does not run away . . . it does not run amok, because it cannot.

The video speaks of sterile universes. Of course, because there are multi-levels, multi-horizons, multi-space-times of every universe of a multiverse. Stephen Hawking wrote of the ever shifting over "Life Zone" of our verse. I write of an infinite 'Flatland' horizontal versus, or perpendicular to, an infinite creative / destructive verticality.

People will have differing views (observations) of . . . differing interpretations of . . . differing dimensions for . . . exactly the same object or subject matter. Often irritating even when largely compatible.
According to '100.000 km tras los OVNI', J J Benítez, 70s, when asked about If they believe in God, UFO crew said: 'We believe in the Almighty force which controls 15 billion universes'
Today, we know our universe is travelling by gravity towards another one close to ours, in a arrangement similar to plant sprouts, the seven branches candel tree, 'Menorah', Abrahan took along with him as symbol when called out of Ur, town in Caldea. (Or it was Uruk?)
Gesund +
 
Aug 1, 2023
11
1
15
Visit site
So many universes exist, that human brain have no memory storage power high enough to travel across it all, and remember what was seen.
String theory predicts Singularities exist in the mathematicians' minds, but not in the material world.
Nothing can be compressed below size of strings, below the 'event horizon' of a Black Hole, there can be a ball, not a dot, not a point.
How many perpendiculars can be drawn from a dot to an straight line?
Just one? Niet!: infinite, it was a thick, a fatty dot.
(Postulate in chunky dot, fatty point Geometry)
Blessings +
 

Catastrophe

"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
The difficulty I have with "different universes" (apart from the ONE Universe being "all there is") is that why should different universes arise from every deviation in human actions? Why not from the actions of every different life form in every "universe"? Come to that, why not from every atom in every "universe"? I would rather keep to possibilities rather than to universes.

But see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#:~:text=The different universes within the,, or "many worlds".

"The multiverse is the hypothetical set of all universes."
Clearly a universal definition of universe is essential for any meaningful discussion,

Cat :)
 
Last edited:
The difficulty I have with "different universes" (apart from the ONE Universe being "all there is") is that why should different universes arise from every deviation in human actions? Why not from the actions of every different life form in every "universe"? Come to that, why not from every atom in every "universe"? I would rather keep to possibilities rather than to universes.

But see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#:~:text=The different universes within the,, or "many worlds".

"The multiverse is the hypothetical set of all universes."
Clearly a universal definition of universe is essential for any meaningful discussion,

Cat :)
I don't usually want to address you directly for reasons, but this time I will. The verses of the MULTIVERSE are always, already, there in their infinities, they don't "arise." "Deviation" in life and life actions, and atoms and atomic actions, and so on, simply fall into an already existing path of universe existing to them ('World(s) of Null-A'-type differing universes), not the other way around.
 
Aug 1, 2023
11
1
15
Visit site
I watched the 1:06 minute video, "How many multiverses are there?"

How Many Multiverses Are There? - YouTube

Watched it and it contained so many of my own pictures, so much of my own modeling, and even used so much of my description, particularly my late description with almost complete alteration in interpretations and deductions, I grew irritated. I knew I was not the only one pursuing forms of my own modeling, that it itself was a paralleling rail to rails others were laying down but then they go off on diverging tangents so irritating to me . . . as mine would be to them.

I take immortality in duplicate universes first, which I've dealt with a few times before. Duplication to infinity where an infinite number of you, exact duplicates of you, are living in exactly the same universes duplicated to infinity. I would tell these seers they will never meet since they are essentially quantum entangled. What I mean is they overlay and inlay in reality into just one (single) universe that is all these infinity of duplicate universes in one. Near duplicates in essentially different path lines is a different story, but the borders of these will never cross because there too many ever more differing borders and universes, to infinity, between.

With my own realization that there is no such thing as infinity of quality, I realized that there is no such thing as infinity of dimensions. Having read and thought much on Complexity Science, I confirmed early on, thanks partly to experience, my own view to my own satisfaction that beyond certain points complexity must collapse and fall in on itself. And complexity is exactly what multi-dimensionality is, so it cannot go beyond relativity's four closing box or bubble dimensions. That is what 3- and 4-dimensionality does, close the system.

The 4th dimension, though, is actually '0', the real bottom dimension with '1' (unity), binary base2 0|1 which mathematicians and physicists have not throughout history and still do not recognize as a bottom base singularity (of base2 [and/or] you will not go below) that I know of. Thus, because the primal / fundamental base is binary base 2 (fbb2 0|1) the 4-dimensional cube can be taken to infinity in number and size, and one finite and infinity within the other, of cube. It both opens and closes systems, and universes. It (fbb2 0|1, the double-barrel positive-negative chain-string, the sandwich of positive energy matter and negative energy anti-matter 'Flatland', and/or [grand unifying relativity's 4-dimensional magic cube) provides self-protection for the universe, and the countless universes of the Infinite Multiverse Universe. Dimensions can be built to infinities, but they always reduce to the base no matter what the infinity. It's there but it does not run away . . . it does not run amok, because it cannot.

The video speaks of sterile universes. Of course, because there are multi-levels, multi-horizons, multi-space-times of every universe of a multiverse. Stephen Hawking wrote of the ever shifting over "Life Zone" of our verse. I write of an infinite 'Flatland' horizontal versus, or perpendicular to, an infinite creative / destructive verticality.

People will have differing views (observations) of . . . differing interpretations of . . . differing dimensions for . . . exactly the same object or subject matter. Often irritating even when largely compatible.
A 1978 book by J J Benítez '100.000 km tras los OVNI' , '60000 miles after UFOs', includes a quotation from a pretended interview with a 'flying saucer' crew, when asked: 'Do you believe in God?', he said: 'We believe in the almighty force which controls 13 billion universes'
Well, string theory predicts multiverses.
btw: Human brain has limited memory storage, we probably couldn't travel across all our universe and remember what we watched, imagine with 13 billion universes.
Blessings +
 

Catastrophe

"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
Google result for: string theory predicts multiverses:

This process of curling up, or “compactification”, can be done in countless billions upon billions of different ways. Each compactification produces a different spacetime, meaning that string theory can realistically predict a multiverse populated by 10^500 different universes.


Why this specific number: 10^500 different universes?
All very interesting!

This suggests to me that there may be something questionable in string theory?

Cat :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helio

Catastrophe

"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
As a general open question, can anyone provide what might be construed as scientific definitions of universe and multiverse?. I am not interested in suggestions along the lines of "a universe is all that there is (exists) and there are an infinity (or even just more than one): viz logical contradictions.

Cat:)

If we allow logical contradictions, how about definitions of universes and multiverses - just for fun?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Helio
I think Brian Greene, perhaps a decade ago, showed how the ~ 10^500 figure was derived. A recent book involved the math to overlay string theory with quantum physics, similar to Greene's work, IIRC. Knowing that I'm an amateur physicist, it just looks to me that there is a probability range of ups and downs (energy levels) for the quantum landscape, thus overlaying string theory upon it produces a range (10^500) results.

The problem is that the greater the elegance of math, the greater we are inclined to swallow it as physics. Objective evidence is required for physics, but not for math. "Where's the beef?"

This same book claimed there were six objective tests and argued that the cold spot in the CMBR is a prediction from her model. But I failed to see the other important tests, though perhaps it was my limited ability to see them, but this is unlikely.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe and rod
Philosophy: "You choose your path" (they are all there to be chosen between).
Quantum particle physics: "Every possible path will b taken at all times" (the paths exist at all times).
Albert Einstein: "God does not play dice with the universe!"
Stephen Hawking: "Yes, God does play dice with the universe, but they're loaded!"
....
 
Last edited:

Latest posts