Parallel Universes and Eternal Consequences

[slave2six]

So, I've been reading this book about time travel and as part of the foundation the string theorist who wrote the book goes into some detail about parallel universes. Here's the example that he uses:

Suppose that you are choosing what to eat for lunch and the two options are 1) a tuna sandwich or 2) a salad. As soon as you make your decision, say you choose the salad, then you continue on in this universe in which you eat the salad. But at the same moment that the decision is made, a parallel universe is created in which you chose the tuna sandwich and that universe is as real as the one you are experiencing now.

For this discussion, let's just assume that this idea of parallel universes is factual. I don't want to turn this into a discussion disproving the idea. I just want to ask a question.

If this idea is accurate then it stands to reason that at those times when we are choosing between something good and something bad (e.g. whether or not to cheat on your partner) then even if we make the choice to do good, there is a parallel universe in which you chose to do bad.

Since God is omnipotent and omnipresent one has to assume that he is omnipresent in every universe. That being the case, there are universes in which we make horrible choices. So, when we die, do we face punishment for those choices? Or perhaps are there multiple Heavens and Hells as well?

In any event, if this concept is factual then the undeniable fact that accompanies it is that choices themselves are bad because as soon as you are presented with one, not matter what you do there is a universe in which you did the opposite and you are therefore totally hosed no matter what. It would be better to be an unreasoning biological entity, yeah?

 

[Kurt31416]

The Many Worlds of the Kingdom of the Father is what the historical Jesus in Thomas is talking about.

The now most popular fundamental explanation of existance, from the viewpoint of science, Everett Many Worlds Interpretation of the Quantum Theory first shows up in a science fiction book in 1938. Since then, about half of all science fiction books have had the theme, since it resolves the paradoxes of time travel. It's the same thing as the movie, "Back to the Future". You can always explain it in terms of the movie.

It gives us eternal life, and we live all the lives we possibly could live.

It also resolves why there is suffering in the world. Everything that can happen, does happen, always has, always will. To remove the branches of all possible lives led where anyone suffers, would kill an almost infinite number of people.

Blessed are the poor, for next time they will win the lottery.

And if you both "you's" are you, if you can make the two into ones, that the molecules that make you are just what you ate, not you, you won't know death...

Jesus said: This heaven will pass away, and the one above it will pass away; and those who are dead are not alive, and those who are living will not die. In the days when you ate of what is dead, you made of it what is living. When you come to be light, what will you do? On the day when you were one, you became two. But when you have become two, what will you do? Thomas 11.

It's the same thing as the repeated big bangs of General Relativity recreating you...

The disciples said to Jesus: Tell us how our end will be. Jesus said: Since you have discovered the beginning, why do you seek the end? For where the beginning is, there will the end be. Blessed is he who shall stand at the beginning (in the beginning), and he shall know the end, and shall not know death. Thomas 18

And the same thing as the repeated Big Bangs of Membrane Theory, the current darling of physics. Same many worlds.

 

[Willamena]

What is the string theorists' explanation for how a decision holds the power to split universes? The rest of the post makes no sense without that explanation.

 

[CarlinKnew]

From the moment you were born, you've been making decisions that each had innumerable possible outcomes. For instance, let's say that as a newborn you decided to kick your leg. Already, think of the variables. You could've kicked n times in xyz direction at s speed, burning c calories which would determine the intensity and duration of your crying, how much milk you would drink, the way in which your mother would comfort you, how long you would sleep... something so seemingly inconsequential would spiral out into an entirely different life. If this were the case, then there would be an infinite number of "you" that were nothing like you at all.

 

[Kurt31416]

They've proved with formal math, with Godel's Proof, that that decision point, that branching point, that contingent point, that Free Will point wil always be unknowable to math science.

Free Will is Unknowable. Given a universe that uses the Quantum Theory you can prove it with formal math.

Thank God.

 

[Willamena]

From the moment you were born, you've been making decisions that each had innumerable possible outcomes. For instance, let's say that as a newborn you decided to kick your leg. Already, think of the variables. You could've kicked n times in xyz direction at s speed, burning c calories which would determine the intensity and duration of your crying, how much milk you would drink, the way in which your mother would comfort you, how long you would sleep... something so seemingly inconsequential would spiral out into an entirely different life. If this were the case, then there would be an infinite number of "you" that were nothing like you at all.

You watched too much 'Quantum Leap'.

 

[Phasmid]

From the moment you were born, you've been making decisions that each had innumerable possible outcomes. For instance, let's say that as a newborn you decided to kick your leg. Already, think of the variables. You could've kicked n times in xyz direction at s speed, burning c calories which would determine the intensity and duration of your crying, how much milk you would drink, the way in which your mother would comfort you, how long you would sleep... something so seemingly inconsequential would spiral out into an entirely different life. If this were the case, then there would be an infinite number of "you" that were nothing like you at all.

"Could be"... but why would there be?

 

[Kurt31416]

From the moment you were born, you've been making decisions that each had innumerable possible outcomes. For instance, let's say that as a newborn you decided to kick your leg. Already, think of the variables. You could've kicked n times in xyz direction at s speed, burning c calories which would determine the intensity and duration of your crying, how much milk you would drink, the way in which your mother would comfort you, how long you would sleep... something so seemingly inconsequential would spiral out into an entirely different life. If this were the case, then there would be an infinite number of "you" that were nothing like you at all.

The branches spread out in all directions. You can make basic calculations, such as the person that split from you ten years ago is as close to you as the you of twenty years from now you are saving your money for. Twenty years separate both.

And it's not quite infinite. It from bit. The quantum spin is plus or minus, the charge is plus or minus, you look at a particle that is both up and down, and collapse the wave function, you split the universe into two branches, not an infinite (until a split second later when the number is truly gigantic beyond comprehension.)

We all live foreever in the Many Worlds of the Kingdom of the Father.

 

[CarlinKnew]

You watched too much 'Quantum Leap'.

Never heard of it

"Could be"... but why would there be?

Because the OP says so!

 

[Phasmid]

Because the OP says so!

True... but you seemed to just be stating the theory and not really... answering anything. Not that I am either... I just don't think "could" = "does" so I dispute the OP but can't argue against the theory because I was told not to and

It's late... time to sleep...

 

[Kurt31416]

Quantum Theory of Immortality

The term, 'Quantum Theory of Immortality' (QTI) was proposed in the paper, Does the Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Imply Immortality?, 1998 but the concept was mooted by Euan Squires in 1986 and has been arrived at independently by several people, perhaps as early as 1957. QTI implies that you should expect to live for ever, but nobody else can - i.e. the first person is immortal but the third person is not. The idea is based on the ediface above. The two key ideas are (1) Deutsch-Everett-MWI and (2) the assumption that you only experience those worlds in which you exist.
If QTI is true, that is not necessarily a good thing. You may indeed find that you survive attempted suicide (see Tegmark's Quantum Suicide Experiment) but in most worlds your relatives will be in mourning, and you will probably be in severe pain.
There is an ongoing debate about the validity of the argument, much of it on the basis of anthropic reasoning. At present there is no conclusive evidence to favour the Many-Worlds Interpretation over its competitors, and imprecision in the use of the concepts of identity and consciousness have hampered the resolution of the QTI question.
If you would like to find out more about the debate, please browse this site or visit the everything-list,
James Higgo, July 1999
* Since writing this paper, I have developed my own position so that I now believe that a thought does not necessarily imply a thinker. All we are is our current thought, and there is no objective link to a 'future' thought. In fact, there is no time. This position leads to the same conclusion regarding mortality, however: we should not expect to die. - June 2000
New Page 2

 

[Sola'lor]

I don't support the idea that a new universe is created at every decision. But I would be more likely to support the idea that universes already exist for every possible variant of this universe.

So in that case we would not be held accountable for our mistakes in those universes because we are not those people. We exist in this universe Our counterparts in the other universe may be similar to us butu they would not be us.

 

[slave2six]

I don't support the idea that a new universe is created at every decision. But I would be more likely to support the idea that universes already exist for every possible variant of this universe.

So in that case we would not be held accountable for our mistakes in those universes because we are not those people. We exist in this universe Our counterparts in the other universe may be similar to us but they would not be us.

So, from a religious standpoint, would there be many heavens and hells? If not, would that mean that some versions of "me" would be found by other versions of me in either place? And would justice really be just if God created things such that every possible outcome actually exists?

 

[Kurt31416]

It would make this heaven.

 

[Sola'lor]

Well I would think that each universe would have it's own God, Heaven, and Hell. So unless some really weird inter-universe wormhole opened up you probably would never meet your counterparts.

 

[slave2six]

Well I would think that each universe would have it's own God, Heaven, and Hell. So unless some really weird inter-universe wormhole opened up you probably would never meet your counterparts.

Hmmm. You list yourself as a Christian. Do you believe, then that there are separate Saviours for all the various universes and that there is not really just one God almighty who created them all, is present in them all, and knows all that occurs within them?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

If the theory in the OP is true, then it also means that whenever you make a good choice in this universe, another version of you is not making that good choice, or making a bad choice. Essentially, by making many good choices in this universe, and improving your life as a result, you are screwing over countless other versions of yourself in other universe and dooming them to lives of misery and failure.

 

[slave2six]

If the theory in the OP is true, then it also means that whenever you make a good choice in this universe, another version of you is not making that good choice, or making a bad choice. Essentially, by making many good choices in this universe, and improving your life as a result, you are screwing over countless other versions of yourself in other universe and dooming them to lives of misery and failure.

Yes. Quite a dilemma. Especially if you are a deity that wants people to believe you are merciful, loving and all that...

 

[Anti-thesisofreason]

But what if the parallel universe is like Bizarro world so that what is bad here is good there?
And
Would god still be present in those universes that don't have a concept of god?
And if so what would the fate be of those inhabitants that don't have a concept of god?

I fear the worst.

 

[Anti-thesisofreason]

So, I've been reading this book about time travel and as part of the foundation the string theorist who wrote the book goes into some detail about parallel universes. Here's the example that he uses:

Suppose that you are choosing what to eat for lunch and the two options are 1) a tuna sandwich or 2) a salad. As soon as you make your decision, say you choose the salad, then you continue on in this universe in which you eat the salad. But at the same moment that the decision is made, a parallel universe is created in which you chose the tuna sandwich and that universe is as real as the one you are experiencing now.

For this discussion, let's just assume that this idea of parallel universes is factual. I don't want to turn this into a discussion disproving the idea. I just want to ask a question.

If this idea is accurate then it stands to reason that at those times when we are choosing between something good and something bad (e.g. whether or not to cheat on your partner) then even if we make the choice to do good, there is a parallel universe in which you chose to do bad.

Since God is omnipotent and omnipresent one has to assume that he is omnipresent in every universe. That being the case, there are universes in which we make horrible choices. So, when we die, do we face punishment for those choices? Or perhaps are there multiple Heavens and Hells as well?

In any event, if this concept is factual then the undeniable fact that accompanies it is that choices themselves are bad because as soon as you are presented with one, not matter what you do there is a universe in which you did the opposite and you are therefore totally hosed no matter what. It would be better to be an unreasoning biological entity, yeah?

An interesting dilemma.

The way I understand it is that you don't necessarily make the opposite choice in another universe but the outcome of said choice might differ slightly or the circumstances in which the choice was made might be different in some way. However, the "farther" away one gets from this universe (if one were able to travel from universe to universe) the more different things will get and thus eventually "you" will ultimately making an opposite choice in some other universe.

I would say if GOD were the same god in every universe then GOD himself would have quite the quandary when it comes to who goes to heaven or hell.