What if they launch a relay satellite

Or what if they start picking up signals from our colony on Mars

Yes, and that drives people crazy. Many people get really uncomfortable when they cant explain or define something based on the current science. I can understand it to a degree. How would I feel if I spent decades, or even a lifetime learning a particular set of facts/figures/formulas...only to have them all thrown out the window, or turned sideways by new discoveries or observations? That’s a tough position.

[removed]

Certainly, but it doesn’t necessitate a multiverse

Itd take a long time or lots of fuel to do. I recommend using KSP with realism mods to if want believable enough numbers and such for orbital burns

Thank you!

Orbit exactly on the opposite side of the sun.

They kinda do all this base on math,.. n math without experimentation proved to be misleading at times,. Like may paradoxes that exist,..

Particles occupying contradictory states simultaneously aren't a measurable symptom? It's seems like you have an awful lot of one-sided skepticism on this matter, have you applied any skepticism to the con-side of your original argument though?

I know nothing about Time and Space, but I do remember some kind of Scientist on TV saying that, since space is infinite, there's a 100% certainty that there is an identical planet with someone who looks just like me, or you, living identical lives to us.

[removed]

The universe strives for balance

Humanity has unbalanced the universe

I don't like where you're going with this.../s

To address this specifically, of course the multiverse has been around in sci-fi for forever, that being said it has a bigger degree of popular reception due to its presence in popular media. On the other hand it is not accepted as an element of fantasy, where it seems like it should be. I don’t think people like Sean carol are being specifically paid by the mouse to lie, because they wouldn’t need to. If he saw that it was to his benefit to promote the idea in order to support his more valid science work then why wouldn’t he? Think of Francis cricks book Life Itself, a book promoting the utter crap idea of panspermia. He has admitted he only wrote the book because it was present in popular media and would draw attention to him, and thus his valid science efforts. Of course the mouse isn’t giving scientists money to lie. They don’t have to, it can be a silent agreement that benefits both parties.

By definition nothing can’t exist, but that’s because nothing is the placeholder term for non-existence. Conceptually, that doesn’t make it less real right?

I don't really understand what you are asking but this is the way I think a multiverse works.

Our universe, or at least the way we can understand it, can be thought of as a 4-dimensional object. The three traditional space dimensions, and the time dimension which forms this 4D object. You could think of it as a 3D cube with infinite length edges that changes with every moment of time (by moment I mean every interval of time, which could be infinitesimal if discrete or perhaps time is continuous, think Calculus).

Each dimension, whether time or space, can contain infinite energy/information (think of the # of points on a line, a 1D object). So if you compare a 3D object (for example a cube) to a 2D object (square) the 3D object is made up of an infinite amount of squares stacked ontop of eachother to create the cube. So the cube has infinitely more information, or space, than the square.

So it's not farfetched that a multiverse would have infinitely more information/energy than the universe.

If you take a cross section of our 4D universe, you'd get a snapshot of the current state of the universe, where time doesn't exist, it's just a 3D object with a vast, or infinite amount of information.

So if you add another dimension to the universe, you'd have infinite iterations of our universe, infinite 4D hypercubes, each describing a unique universe (or maybe it doesn't have to be unique, like the squares that make up a cube).

I don't really know how I feel about a 5D multiverse, as the idea is sorta abstract and maybe it doesn't align with the idea of traditional time and space dimensions. Perhaps it isn't a dimension, but some new factor, which is very chaotic, random, and can explain why there would be infinite universe permutations in the multiverse which causes the existence of parallel universes.

I'll leave it with this: I think the fact that our universe is so precisely tuned for us to be able to exist and ponder about the universe proves that the multiverse exist, and that we are just one of the infinite permutations that have the chance to question about the universe.

Why could there not be infinite energy if there is energy in the first place?

Conservation of energy only applies in closed systems and is not a requirement in general relativity

What would conditions change the number?

Well it stops on either side at one point or another even if a multiverse exists. But then if the multiverse is infinite there’s the issue of infinite regress

That’s interesting but I think the problem with the infinite is the issue of infinite regress, right? So are we thinking of infinite as a sort of shaped vacuity? That would be something like an infinite set, whatever that means. That raises big questions about what we mean when we say infinite.

So more like an infinite set?

This is fascinating thank you

You’re making a “brute fact” argument for the multiverse and then saying it’s unprovable. Why shouldn’t that statement be received as dogmatic or delusional?

I’m fairly certain that the term observer in quantum physics is more of a misnomer. From what I understand it means something more like “conditions”

To be fair science fiction can inspire invention, and therefore certain modes of thought. But I do think the multiverse leaves a lot to be desired

I have I was honestly just looking for other perspectives because more than any of his other work it sounds like mental gymnastics coming from him. He’s one of my favorite science writers and thinkers and I’ve collected most of his works, but man I just don’t buy his multiple universes idea or how he defends it