A controversial experiment threatened to kill the multiverse in 2025

 

The multiverse was proposed as a way to make sense of bizarre quantum behaviour. Image courtesy of Victor De Schwanberg/Science Photo Library

Joel Kontinen

A photon was apparently detected in two places at once in a twist on the classic double-slit experiment, but many physicists didn't accept the results.

A physics experiment published this year that claimed to measure a single photon in two places at once – and, in the process, discredit the idea of a multiverse – drew pushback from many sceptical physicists, but the scientists behind the demonstration stand by their claim.

In May, Holger Hofmann at Hiroshima University in Japan and his colleagues reported the results of a modified version of the famous double-slit experiment that showed individual photons being “delocalised”, or impossible to tie down in one place.

However, there is only one universe.

Source: 

Alex Wilkins 2025 A controversial experiment threatened to kill the multiverse in 2025 | New Scientist 30 December

The Multiverse doesn't exist

 

Image courtecy of  Shutterstock/Vchal.  

Joel Kontinen

A new way of interpreting the elusive mathematics of quantum mechanics could fundamentally change our understanding of reality

The many-more-worlds interpretation enlarges the multiverse

What do we know about multiverses. Are They Real? Some say that the “Multiverse could be Infinitely bigger than we ever imagine”, This Is According to a new interpretation of quantum mechanics that describes realms upon realms of parallel universes created with every decision we make.

Those  who say that multiverses are real refer to  ‘The heart of quantum mechanics is the wave function, An Infamously abstract and fuzzy mathematical tool that is extremely good at describing the behaviour of photons, electrons and other denizens of the quantum realm. “

But What Exactly Is the wave function? After almost a century of arguments, physicists still disagree on How they come about.

So it seems that multiverses are not real. They are a figment of some progressive  thinking that is not based on fact.

Source; 

Karmela Padavic-Callaghan, 2024, The multiverse could be much, much bigger than we ever imagined | New Scientist 9 April

Antimatter Is still The Big Bang’s Problem

The Big Bang should have produced equal amounts of matter and antimatter. Image courtesy of NASA.


Joel Kontinen

Evolutionists think that the big bang is ”the beginning of all things. Space, time, matter and energy bursting into existence from a pinprick of infinite temperature and density. Space racing away from itself faster than the speed of light. Maybe even the making of a multiverse.”

The multiverse is a bogus idea. No scientific data can testify of it.

Antimatter is like matter, but it has the opposite electrical charge and it destroys normal matter when they interact. It thus means the universe shouldn’t exist, CERN physicists conclude. or they will have to do away with the Big Bang Model.

A part form of dark matter and dark energy, antimatter is a problem for the big bang. it is not produced naturally and experiments produce so little of it that they do not give proof of its reality.


Source:

Webb, Richard. 2020. The antimatter factory about to solve the universe's greatest mystery. New Scientist 26 February.
,

Why the Multiverse is Religion, not Science

Image courtesy of HossenfelderS, CC BY-SA 4.0.




Joel Kontinen

Theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder is an author and theoretical physicist who researches quantum gravity. She is a Research Fellow at the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies.

She did her PhD degree in Black Holes in Large Extra Dimensions and she, has written for Nature, New Scientist, Scientific American.

Now, she says that the multiverse idea is religion. I would say that while we cannot have an encounter with God, we know that he lives and He’s given us His word the Bible that we know is the truth.

Disbelief in God Leads to Bizarre Beliefs

G. K. Chesterton, by Ernest Herbert Mills, 1909. Public domain.




Joel Kontinen

Why are bizarre beliefs, such as the multiverse and a universe teeming with alien civilisations, rampant in our day?

British author G. K. Chesterton (1874–1936) might have the answer:

“When men stop believing in God they don't believe in nothing; they believe in anything.”

This quote is widely attributed to Chesterton, although it obviously does not appear verbatim in his works; it was first recorded as 'The first effect of not believing in God is to believe in anything' in Emile Cammaerts’ book The Laughing Prophet: The Seven Virtues and G.K. Chesterton (London: Methuen & Co., 1937].

Chesterton was especially critical of atheism and Darwinian evolution.

Bizarre beliefs tend to either ignore or try to explain away cosmic fine tuning that is evident everywhere, from the micro to the macro.

Source:

Knowles, Elizabeth. (ed). 2004. Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

We Can’t Ignore Cosmic Fine Tuning, Astrophysics Professor Says

We can see fine tuning in things like ferns, for instance.




Joel Kontinen

Fine tuning is an enormous hurdle for the naturalistic worldview.

We see it everywhere, from the tiny to the huge, and it is often displayed as great beauty, as in fractals, Fibonacci numbers and the golden rule that are practically ubiquitous in the universe.

Writing in New Scientist, Geraint Lewis, who is Professor of Astrophysics at the University of Sydney, takes the naturalist bull by the horns and suggests that the universe “may be fine-tuned for life. The idea is that physical laws and constants are inexplicably just right to support it.”

He says that this view is becoming more popular and thinks that a heated debate may be just round the proverbial corner.

Some agnostics and atheists would want to explain away the fine tuning by invoking the multiverse, which, as astronomer Danny R. Faulkner puts it, is “a radical departure into philosophy or religion” and is not science at all.

There’s only one logical explanation for all this fine tuning: “In the beginning God created.”

Source:

Lewis, Geraint. 2017. A fine-tuned universe may be controversial but can’t be ignored. New Scientist (28 June).

Missing Antimatter: A Huge Problem for the Big Bang

The Big Bang should have produced equal amounts of matter and antimatter. Image courtesy of NASA.




Joel Kontinen

Cosmic inflation or the unexpected acceleration of the baby universe for no known reason is not the only serious problem with the Big Bang.

The other dilemmas include quantum fluctuations, dark matter, dark energy, too rapidly forming galaxies and missing antimatter.

The very idea of a quantum fluctuation hardly sounds like science.

Recently, some researchers acknowledged that they doubt the existence of dark energy.

Early galaxies grew too fast for the Big Bang.

And then there’s the issue of antimatter. Or, to put it more precisely: There isn’t any antimatter, although there should be, if the Big Bang were true.

This is no laughing matter. ABS Science says:

“The Standard Model of particle physics — which accurately describes all the particles and interactions that make up our universe — says our universe shouldn't exist.

Or at least, the matter that makes up all the stuff in existence shouldn't be here. It should have been wiped out by the matching antimatter that was created with it in the first second after the Big Bang.”

The BB should have created equal amounts of matter and antimatter, but the antimatter has obvious gone AWOL and is not about to return.

Matter and antimatter would have destroyed each other, thus leaving no universe for us to study.

Each particle (electron, proton, neutron etc.) should have a matching antiparticle with the opposite charge.

Researchers are currently trying to simulate the assumed conditions following the Big Bang. They are smashing particles together near the speed of light in the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in order to figure out how the world of matter got rid of the antimatter.

But all the facts suggest that there never was a Big Bang. The BB has to be propped up with unknown and totally hypothetical entities or features to keep it alive.

Some of the attempts used in bolstering up faith in an old solar system are beginning to sound like the epicycles that were used to explain the movements of the planets in the ancient Ptolemaic (geocentric) system.

An even more desperate attempt is to speculate about multiverses or multiple universes that are totally unscientific.




Source:

Hobbs, Bernie. 2016. The antimatter mystery: Annihilation and a universe that shouldn't exist. ABS Science (24 June).

“The Multiverse Idea Is a Radical Departure into Philosophy or Religion,” Astronomer Says.

The idea of many universes is an attempt to explain design without God. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.


Joel Kontinen


What do some secular scientists do when everything in the universe looks like it has been designed? They invoke a hypothetical idea that can never be proved, because they do not accept the idea of a Higher Being who would set the rules.

Astronomer Danny R. Faulkner, who is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of the University of South Carolina Lancaster, has written over a hundred papers in astronomy journals. Referring to Lawrence Krauss’ book A Universe from Nothing (2012), he says:

“The now widespread belief in the multiverse among cosmologists amounts to a surrender in the war over design. They have painted themselves into a corner, because, even with their big bang cosmogony they are left with strong theistic implications. Unwilling to accept that there may be a God, they in desperation have resorted to defining away the problem. There is no evidence for a multiverse, nor, by definition, could there ever be.

This is a radical departure into philosophy or religion, but it doesn’t seem to bother these cosmologists. Having painted themselves into a corner, blowing the wall away to make a door to escape through is the only choice that they have. This is a tacit admission that they have lost the design debate for this universe.”

Source:

Mitchell, Elizabeth. 2013. Are We One of Many, or Did God Design the Universe with Physics That Actually Works? Answers in Genesis (August 3).

Well-known Cosmologist Doubts Parallel Worlds

In multiverse thinking, there are many parallel universes. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.




Joel Kontinen

Multiverse thinking or the belief in the existence of parallel universes is more philosophy or science fiction than science. ”Cosmology must seem odd to scientists in other fields”.

George Ellis, a well-known mathematician and cosmologist, who for instance has written a book with Stephen Hawking, is sceptical of the idea that our universe is just another universe among many others.

A few weeks ago, Ellis, professor emeritus of applied mathematics at the University of Cape Town, reviewed Brian Greene’s book The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos (Knopf/Allen Lane, 2011) in the journal Nature. He is not at all convinced that the multiverse hypothesis is credible: ”Greene is not presenting aspects of a known reality; he is telling of unproven theoretical possibilities.”

According to professor Ellis, there is no evidence of multiverses, they cannot be tested and they are not science.

Ellis is not the only multiverse sceptic in this universe. A few months ago, science writer John Horgan wrote a column in Scientific American, expressing his doubt in multiverses.

Multiverse thinking is basically an atheistic attempt to solve some huge problems with the big bang and explain why the universe could have been formed without a design or a Designer.



Source:


Ellis, George. 2011. The untestable multiverse. Nature 469 (7330), 294-295.

Scientific American’s Columnist: Scientists Should Not Study Worlds That Only Exist In Their Imagination

Our universe is not the only one in multiverse thinking. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.



Joel Kontinen

John Horgan, who writes a weekly online column for Scientific American magazine, recently read Brian Greene’s new book The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos and was obviously not very pleased with it.

Multiverse is not a new idea. Astronomers have speculated about the existence of other universes for some years and even Scientific American has toyed with the idea.

Recently, Stephen Hawking, for instance, said that he takes the idea of multiple universes seriously.

There is a major problem with this thinking, however. There is not a shred of evidence for the existence of any other universe. As Horgan says:

“These multiverse theories all share the same fundamental defect: They can be neither confirmed nor falsified. Hence, they don't deserve to be called scientific, according to the well-known criterion proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper. Some defenders of multiverses and strings mock skeptics who raise the issue of falsification as ‘Popperazis’—which is cute but not a counterargument. Multiverse theories aren't theories—they're science fictions, theologies, works of the imagination unconstrained by evidence.”

Horgan might have added that when man shuts God outside his thinking, he begins to speculate. At times, this can lead to rather weird ideas.

Source:

Horgan, John. 2011. Is speculation in multiverses as immoral as speculation in subprime mortgages? Scientific American (2 February).