Creation Issues Links
Site Section Links
We have the right to believe at our own risk any hypothesis that is live enough to tempt our will. - William James
Infinite Universes Paradigm
This paradigm is called the MWI (Many Worlds Interpretation) and is supported by many physicists, some of them notable—or should I say notorious? In the variations of this paradigm there exist an infinite number of universes in which all the possibilities are covered, and the number is growing exponentially along with the burgeoning possibilities.
In this paradigm the ultimate reality is chance or possibility. There is no purpose, no design, no basis for ethics other than to just play the odds. Every question has the same answer. It just happens, it just IS in this world. This paradigm makes a mockery of anything but temporary philosophy and chimerical foundation for morality. Martin Gardiner makes two salient points:
In the MWI, most of its defenders agree, there is no room for free will. The multiverse, the universe of all universes, develops strictly along determinist lines, always obeying the deterministically evolving Schrödinger equation. This equation is a monstrous wave function which never collapses unless it is observed and collapsed by an intelligence outside the multiverse, namely God.—Martin Gardiner, Multiverses and Blackberries
The stark truth is that there is not the slightest shred of reliable evidence that there is any universe other than the one we are in. No multiverse theory has so far provided a prediction that can be tested. In my layman's opinion they are all frivolous fantasies. As far as we can tell, universes are not as plentiful as even two blackberries. Surely the conjecture that there is just one universe and its Creator is infinitely simpler and easier to believe than that there are countless billions upon billions of worlds, constantly increasing in number and created by nobody. I can only marvel at the low state to which today's philosophy of science has fallen.—Martin Gardiner, Multiverses and Blackberries
This most absurd "explanation" of them all, the "many worlds"
hypothesis, is the most outrageous "scientific" copout ever dignified by
journalism. If taken seriously and to its logical conclusion, it would
undermine any basis for serious science, including any basis for
morality, in that no matter what choices one would make in this world,
any and all possibilities would inexorably take place in another.
There is a huge amount of insanity out there, dressed up in suit and tie, bolstered and emboldened by degrees from prestigious universities, holding forth with aplomb to their gullible non-critical-thinking audiences, and this is one prime example.